^WMiPlrlmfBiHmftHIIWffftlMfl*itttiiti  huuh.ii 

>'•■■■  ''■'-'■•■■•>'■'...■      ■ 

EBB  ■■  •   ■.    *    -  ■    ■         .  ■    .,  ,  v.      . 

■.■.■•••■■■.■'■■".■ 


■■■■,••■"..'-       :"  '■»■''.■  ..' 
Rfflro  ''     '     '•.-',.■•■  ■■■v        <?yffi*K 

'■■••■■,.•''•-■...••<,•■■' 

*>"  •rjMf    InwwM     ,..,........■. 

mBS  ">•:■     ■"■•"   ■'•'  ■'■■■ 


Ml 


sBHR  633    H 

■.  ^  ■•-■■■■;-.:..:..■.•■'■.■  '■,.:.  :.. 

■■■•.■■":.■■.■'■■:,;.■;;..:.■■■...'■ 
■  ■  •'■    ,..■'■.-...■..■.■',  , 

...'■.■■■,.......  .'-,., 

.";•"■'■•..■•■■•.'''••'  ■■      ■■•.'..     >  .-     i 
'.'■•■.'".,.....•... 

■■'>-■•■■.    ■;...•   .AM  *i3W<;  WOW  viMMrta-t 

■"■•.'■■*■•■■<■',.■■,•.■■' 
■      J  ..■:■.■■■.....•.,..  ■ 
•••.':,■.■■'   ffii^ifFifHJtmfeifflr'*'! 


■■■'■  *'u 
MHT 


".  i  ■"'..'   ■'■ 

•    ■;■■'"■••■■■.■'■'  fl  •■  ■ 
■■■■••.'•.»■'■.».',..,/■■ 


RHHi 


Columbia  (Bntoettfitp 

mtijeCttpofJtogork 


LIBRARY 


THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED, 


BY  A  REFERENCE  TO 


THE    HISTORY 


OF    ITS 


ORIGIN,    PERPETUATION,  AND   EXTENSION, 


INTO 


THE    UNITED    STATES. 


BY  THE  REV  W.  D.  WILSON,  D.  D., 

TEOI-E8BOR    OF    MORAL    AND    INTELLECTUAL    PHILOSOPHY    AND   OF    HISTORT 

IN    GENEVA    COLLEGE. 


NhW     YORK: 
DANIEL  DANA,  .Ml.,  381   BROADWAY. 

1HM).  ' 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  vear  1850, 

BY  W.  D.  WILSON,  D.  D. 

In  the  <  "erV'a  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States, 

ici  the  Northern  District  of  New  York. 


Billin  and  Rbotbsh 
Printers  aud  Sterectyj"  m,  20  North  William  St.,  N«w  York. 


*^r*s-s\s  /> 


t  t  4         „ 

I 


TO 

WILLIAM    C.    PIERREPONT,    ESQ 

OF 

PIERREPONT    MANOR, 

THIS  VOLUME 

is, 

BY     HIS     PERMISSION, 

MOST  RESPECTFULLY 

DEDICATED 

BY   THE 

A  U  T  II  <)  R. 


1011  1)7 


PREFACE  TO  THE  STEREOTYPE  EDITION. 


In  sending  forth  this  Edition  of  The  Church  Identified, 
I  hardly  know  whether  to  call  it  the  second  or  the  third. 
The  Work  consists  of  a  series  of  Articles,  which  appeared  in 
"the  Churchman"  during  the  Autumn  and  Winter  of  1848-9. 
This  was  the  first  "  Edition"  or  "  giving  forth"  of  the 
Work  to  the  public.  The  Articles  were  so  kindly  received 
that  a  proposal  was  soon  made  to  issue  an  edition  in  a  book 
form,  with  a  specific  reference  to  its  circulation  in  the  Dio- 
cese of  Western  New  York.  That  edition  consisted  of  only 
one  thousand  copies,  and  was  exhausted  almost  at  once.  I 
now  send  forth  the  Work  a  third  time  in  a  form,  and 
under  circumstances,  as  I  trust,  calculated  to  give  it  a  much 
wider  circulation,  and  to  supply  it  in  larger  quantities. 
Hence  this  is  really  the  third  "  editio"  or  "  edition' '.' 

In  preparing  this  edition  I  have  carefully  considered  all 
the  criticisms  and  suggestions  concerning  it  which  have  come 
to  my  knowledge. 

In  some  cases  I  have  rewritten  a  paragraph  or  statement, 
and  expanded  it  without  adding  anything  more  than  what 
loomed  necessary  to  guard  against  the  misapprehension  into 
which  readers  had  fallen  concerning  my  meaning  and  de- 
sign. In  other  cases  I  have  not  iced  that  an  important 
point,  did  not  make  the  impression  which  il  ought  to  make  in 
onl.-r  that  the  force  of  the  argument  might  be  duly  appre- 
ciated. This  defect  I  have  also  endeavored  to  remedy  so  far 
as  I  could  ;  rillier  by  resorting  to  a  new  arrangement  of  the 
matter,  or  a  new  form  of  the  statement. 


vi  PREFACE. 

Besides  this  I  have  added  some  new  matter.  For  the  sake 
of  comparing  this  edition  with  the  previous,  and  to  show  at 
once  what  has  been  added,  I  give  the  following  list  of  the 
Sections  in  which  the  new  matter  will  be  chiefly  found. 
Chapter  I.  §  7  and  1 2. 

II.  §  10 

III.  §   10  and  21—24. 

IV.  §  1—5 

V.  §  65. 

VII.  §  3  and  7. 

VIII.  §  4,  5,  7  and  8. 

"  X.  §   1 — 37  inclusive. 

The  first  part  of  Chap.  IV.  in  the  last  edition,  has  been 
transferred  to  the  beginning  of  Chap.  III.  in  this. 

The  defence  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in 
the  United  States  has  hitherto,  for  the  most  part,  been 
made  to  depend  upon  the  successful  vindication  of  the  seve- 
ral points  of  its  Polity,  and  the  Apostolical  Succession  of  its 
Bishops. 

Perhaps  a  proper  regard  to  what  is  due  under  the  circum- 
stances, would  require  me  to  enter,  somewhat  at  length,  into 
the  reasons  for  resorting  to  a  new  mode  of  doing  what  has 
been  so  successfully  done  heretofore,  in  the  old.  I  shall  not, 
however,  enter  upon  a  detail  of  the  reasons  and  motives  for 
this  work.  Many  of  them  will  occur  to  the  reader  as  he 
passes  over  the  pages  :  some  of  them  are  stated  in  the  body 
of  the  work  itself :  and  perhaps  the  fact  that  the  novelty  of 
the  plan  will  attract  and  interest  readers  in  what  can  never 
be  too  well  understoood,  may  be  regarded  as  all  the  apology 
that  my  course  demands. 

The  position  of  those  who  defend,  and  those  who  oppose 
the  Episcopal  Polity  of  the  Church,  is  now  greatly  changed 
from  what  it  was  when  the  controversies  on  this  subject  first 
commenced  in  England  ;  and  we  seem  to  have  followed  the 
line  of  argument  then  marked  out  and  pursued  by  the  great 


PREFACE.  vii 

minds  of  the  mother  Church  without  sufficiently  considering 
the  change  that  has  taken  place  in  the  nature  of  the  issue 
itself,  and  in  the  relative  position  of  the  parties  to  the  con- 
troversy. 

The  question  then,  was  not  whether  a  Church  could  be 
instituted  without  Episcopacy  and  the  Apostolic  Succession 
— or  whether  such  a  Church  could  be  acknowledged  as  a 
part  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  in  case  it  should  be  instituted — 
but  it  was  whether  Episcopacy  and  the  Succession  should 
be  retained  or  not  in  a  Branch  of  the  Church  already  es- 
tablished and  identified  with  the  Church  of  Christ.  The 
early  opposers  of  Episcopacy  seem  not  to  have  designed  to 
leave  the  English  Church  and  found  one  on  another  basis, 
but  rather  to  remodel  that  Church  upon  a  Presbyterian  plat- 
form. 

But,  with  us,  the  question  has  been  treated  as  if  it  were 
whether  there  could  be  a  Branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ, 
without  Bishops  in  the  direct  line  of  Apostolic  Succession. 

The  following  pages  present  to  the  consideration  of  the 
reader  an  entirely  different  question  ;  and  enter  into  no  dis- 
cussion of  points  of  external  order  and  organization,  either 
as  it  regards  their  nature  or  their  importance. 

This  distinction   can  be  seen  and  appreciated   by  any  one 
who   will  devote  to   it  a  few   moments  of  attention.      The 
former  was  simply  a  question  of  reformation  in  what  already 
existed  by  divine  right,  which  men  had  a  right,   indeed,  to 
reform,  if  reformation  were  needed,  but  which  they  could  not 
abolish,  and  were  most   sacredly  bound  to  preserve  and  per- 
petuate.   The  latter  Mas  a  question  of  instituting    anew  that, 
which  had  had  no  existence   before.      Hence  it  may    follow 
that  even   if  Episcopacy   Mid   the   Apostolic   Succession    are 
not  essentia]  to  the  Church,  the  modern  leoti  ue  none  the 
more  to  be  regarded  u  branches  of  Chrkt'i  visible  Church 
on  this  account  ;   for    it  *  ill  at.  once  be  seen  that  it  may  ap- 
pear on   investigation    that  something   more  than   any  parti- 


viii  PREFACE. 

cular  form   of  organization  or  Ministry  is  necessary  to  con- 
stitute a  Branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 

The  main  conclusions  of  my  work  are  so  coincident  with 
what  has  been  generally  held  and  taught  by  Episcopalians  in 
this  country,  that  I  shall  hardly  need  to  say  any  thing  more 
about  them. 

I  suppose  that  most  persons  have  felt  that  there  is  some- 
thing of  the  acrimony  of  sectarian  zeal  inseparable  from  all 
the  discussions  and  controversies  between  those  who  advo- 
cate and  those  who  oppose  the  claims  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church.  And  indeed,  so  long  as  we  make  the 
peculiarities  of  its  Constitution,  Polity,  and  Worship  the 
ground  of  our  preference  for  it,  I  do  not  well  see  how  the 
subject  can  be  treated  without  exciting  some  of  those  unholy 
and  carnal  feelings  which  are  most  directly  opposed  to  the 
spirit  of  Christianity  and  most  repugnant  to  the  feelings  of 
humble  and  devout  piety. 

I  hope  that  the  mode  of  presenting  the  subject,  pursued 
in  the  following  pages,  will  avoid,  to  a  very  great  extent,  if 
not  altogether,  this  evil,  which  has  already  led  the  great 
mass  of  the  people  to  shrink  with  dread  from  every  thing 
that  has  the  appearance  of  a  controversial  design,  or  of  treat- 
ing a  controverted  subject. 

In  pursuing  my  plan,  I  have  carefully  abstained  from 
every  statement  and  expression  that  could  seem  to  proceed 
from  unkind  feelings,  and,  as  far  as  possible,  from  all  that 
could  give  pain  to  the  reader.  I  have  wished  and  designed, 
that  even  if  he  could  not  agree  with  me  in  my  conclusions, 
he  might  feel  that  I  have  done  him  no  wrong  and  intended 
none.  I  have  had  no  motive  for  writing  but  love  for  Christ 
and  for  the  souls  for  which  He  died  :  I  hope  my  reader  will 
allow  himself  to  be  influenced  by  no  other,  while  he  reads 
what  I  have  written. 

My  method  of  treating  the  subject  has  necessarily  in- 
volved a  great  deal  of  historic  discussion  and  narrative.  But 


PREFACE.  be 

it  is  the  history  of  the  Church  itself  that  has  been  called 
into  requisition.  Of  this  we  cannot  know  too  much.  I  trust 
that  this  feature  of  my  book  will  not  only  make  it  more  in- 
teresting than  it  could  otherwise  be,  but  also  more  instruc- 
tive  and  profitable,  by  producing  a  greater  familiarity  with 
those  great  cardinal  facts  in  the  history  of  the  Church  with 
which  every  Christian  ought  to  be  acquainted.  The  atten- 
tive reader  will  hardly  fail  to  get  a  pretty  good  idea  of  the 
outline  of  the  Church's  History  from  the  following  pages. 
Thus  while  pursuing  the  main  object,  an  incidental  one  of 
scarcely  less  importance  will.be  accomplished  also,  without 
additional  labor  or  effort. 

With  the  Prayer  that  "  all  who  profess  and  call  them- 
selves Christians,  may  be  led  into  the  way  of  truth,  and 
hold  the  Faith  in  unity  of  spirit,  in  the  bond  of  peace,  and 
in  righteousness  of  life,"  I  commend  the  work  to  the  serious 
and  prayerful  attention  of  all  those  who,  in  sincerity  and 
truth,  desire  a  knowledge  of  the  Lord's  ways. 

W.  D.  WILSON. 
Geneva,  New- York,  September ,  1850. 


CONTENTS 


PAOK 

CHAPTER  I.— THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  IDENTITY  OF  THE 
CHURCH  CONSIDERED  INDEPENDENTLY  OF 
THE   PECULIARITIES    OF   ITS    CONSTIUTION.        13 

«      "       II.— THE      MODE      OF     HISTORIC     IDENTIFICATION 

STATED   AND   ILLUSTRATED.    -        -        -  31 

«      "     III.— THE    CHURCH    BEFORE    THE      REFORMATION, 

AND  ITS   CONDITION    AT  THE   TIME.     -        -  64 

«  «  IV.— THE  REFORMATION  IN  ENGLAND,  AND  ITS 
EFFECTS  UPON  THE  CONDITION  OF  THE 
CHURCH.  - 112 

«      N       v.— THE    ORIGIN    OF   MODERN    SECTS   AND  THEIR 

RELATION   TO  THE   CHURCH.  160 

H  M  VI.— THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND  SINCE  THE  RE- 
FORMATION.       260 

«       «    VII.— THE      INTRODUCTION    OF   THE    CHURCH   INTO 

THE    UNITED   STATES. 278 

M      cc  VIII.— THE     ROMISH     CLAIM      TO    JURISDICTION     IN 

THE   UNITED   STATES   CONSIDERED.      -        -        313 

u      »      IX.— THE     IDENTITY    OF    SPIRIT.         ....  343 

"      "        X.— THE     MORAL    DESIGN    OF    THE    CHURCH    AND 

THE  EFFECTS  OF   SECTARIANISM.        -        -  305 


THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  IMPORTANCE  OF  THE  IDENTITY  OF  THE  CHURCH 
CONSIDERED  INDEPENDENTLY  OF  THE  PECULIARITIES 
OF    ITS  CONSTITUTION. 

There  is  hardly  any  fact  more  certain,  with  regard 
to  Christianity,  than  that  our  Blessed  Saviour  founded 
a  Church,  or  caused  one  to  be  founded,  by  His  Apostles, 
in  His  name.  It  is  also  admitted  that  this  institution 
was,  and  is,  most  intimately  connected  with  His  Re- 
ligion. The  proposition  seems  self-evident,  and  is 
almost  universally  held.  Yet  in  this  age  but  little 
seems  to  be  known  about  that  Church,  its  nature,  ob- 
ject, and  designs,  and  the  great  mass  are  ready  to 
acknowledge  that  there  is  no  small  difficulty  in  identi- 
fying it,  among  so  many  claimant  sects. 

In  the  midst  of  this  difficulty,  some  have  thought 
that  the  identity  of  (he  Church  is  a  matter  of  no  im- 
portant— that  if  we  oan  find  a  church  that  is  evan- 
gelical m  its  ohaxaoter,  encourages  sincere  piety, and 

good  morals,  all  is  accomplished  that  can  be  iieecs-ary. 

Still,  however,  people  are  not  satisfied   with  this. 


14  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

They  have  some  idea  of  a  church  established  by  Christ 
and  his  Apostles,  as  a  visible  and  distinct  thing ;  and 
even  when  they  affirm  that  it  is  of  no  material  conse- 
quence what  church  we  belong  to,  if  it  is  only  sound 
in  its  doctrines,  they  do  nevertheless  betray  no  little 
uneasiness  when  it  is  said,  or  intimated,  that  the 
church  to  which  they  belong  is  not  the  same  identical 
Church  as  that  which  our  Saviour  founded. 

This  uneasiness  occasioned  by  the  intimation  that 
any  particular  organization  of  people,  professing  to  be 
Christians,  is  not  a  branch  of  the  Church  which  was 
once  established  by  divine  authority,  is  proof  that  there 
is  in  every  heart  a  feeling,  or  consciousness,  of  the  im- 
portance of  the  identity  of  that  Church. 

The  theor  *  ^"    ^°  Set  ^  °^   tn*S  feenng>  or  to  avoid 

of  an  invisi-  the  difficulties  that  arise  from  its  admission, 

*    ble  Church.       .-,  -,  .  r-  1     .  .  i  -i  •    i 

there  has  arisen,  oi  late  years,  a  theory  which 
holds  that  this  importance  attaches  only  to  an  invisible 
Church,  and  not  to  the  outward  and  visible  society 
which  we  call  by  that  name.  This  invisible  Church 
is  supposed  to  consist  of  the  number  of  persons — secret 
to  us,  and  known  only  to  God — who  have  been  elected 
from  eternity  to  eternal  life — or  of  those  who  have  been 
the  subjects  of  an  inward  change  or  renewal ;  and  it  is 
also  held  that  this  number  is  independent  on,  and  re- 
gardless of,  outward  signs  and  visible  organization. 

Without  discussing  this  theory  at  all,  it  is  sufficient 
for  the  present  to  note  the  fact  that  it  is  unsatisfactory. 
If  the  theory  of  the  invisible  Church  were  satisfactory 
to  their  own  minds,  those  that  adopt  it  would  be  en- 
tirely indifferent  to  the  identity  of  the  visible  Church. 
But  thev  are  none  the  less  unwilling  to  admit  that  the 


I.J  THE   IDENTITY   CONSIDERED.  15 

visible  society  to  which  they  belong'  is  not,  or  by  any 
possibility  may  not  be,  a  branch  of  that  visible  Church 
which  has  existed  from  the  Apostles'  days,  than  they 
would  have  been  if  they  had  resorted  to  no  such 
theory. 

§  3.  The  common  impression,  with  resrard      Another 

r  °  theory  stated. 

to  the  Church,  is,  that  all  protestant  denomi- 
nations stand  before  him  who  is  in  search  of  the  truth 
and  the  true  fellowship  of  Christ's  Disciples,  on  an 
equal  footing — that  there  is  one  Church,  called  the 
Catholic,  or  sometimes  the  Roman  Catholic,  which  has 
existed  ever  since  the  Apostles,  and  that  all  the  others, 
being  alike  the  result  of  voluntary  association  and 
combination  among  men  since  the  Reformation,  it  is 
absurd  and  wicked  for  any  one  of  them  to  claim  any 
superiority  over  the  other — to  be  exclusive,  or  judge 
another  unworthy  of  its  fellowship. 

k  4.  If  the  hypothesis   here  assumed   be    Thisimpres- 

,  ..  ..  -,ii  t*  '  c    8'on      i"ude- 

correct,  the  conclusion  is  inevitable,  .bor,  n  quate. 
any  number  of  men,  taking  the  Scriptures  for 
their  guide,  have  originated  a  church  in  one  form, 
another  similar  body  of  men,  differing  from  them  in  their 
views  of  the  meaning  of  the  Scripture,  may  originate 
anot  h<r  church  in  another  form,  and  so  on ;  each  being 
obliged,  by  the  condition  of  its  existence,  to  concede 
to  the  other  the  validity  which  it  claims  for  itself. 

And  such  is  the  opinion, or  rather,  perhaps  I  should 
say,  the  feeling,  of  the  vast  majority  of  the  people  of 
our  hind,  in  regard  to  the  relation  that  ought  to  exist 

between  the  various  religious  bodies  of  which  it  is 
composed. 

And  \r\  there  is  not  a  denomination  that  acts  upon 


!6  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

this  principle,  unless  it  be  some  of  those  whose  claims 
are  generally  considered  to  be  the  least  worthy  of 
regard.  Thus,  the  Episcopalians  will  not  allow  min- 
isters of  other  denominations  to  minister  at  their  altars. 
The  Baptists  will  not  receive  to  their  communions 
any  who  have  not  been  immersed  on  profession  of 
faith.  The  Presbyterians — that  is,  the  old  Scotch 
Presbyterians — will  not  fellowship  with  Congregational 
denominations.  The  Methodists  and  Congregational- 
ists  have  also  certain  views  of  the  nature  of  Christ, 
and  of  the  duration  of  the  future  punishment  of  the 
wicked,  which  exclude  large  classes  of  persons  who 
profess  to  be  guided  by  the  same  rule,  aiming  at  the 
same  result,  and  equally  as  sincere  as  themselves. 

Thisexciu-  §.  5.  This  practical  exclusiveness  has  been 
c^T  nin  f°und  indispensable,  not  only  to  the  exercise 
practice.  0f  discipline,  but  also,  and  still  more,  to  the 
preservation  of  the  distinct  existence  of  the  bodies 
themselves.  If  no  test  were  proposed,  no  profession 
required,  and  no  rule  adopted,  it  would  be  impossible 
to  tell  what  the  Church  is,  where  it  is,  or  of  whom  it 
is  composed.  Accordingly  each  sect  has  singled  out 
what  it  regards  as  its  leading  feature,  or  distinctive 
point,  and  makes  that  its  test ;  as  Episcopacy,  Pres- 
bytery, Immersion,  or  agreement  in  some  articles  of 
faith  which  it  has  decided  to  consider  fundamental ; 
and  excludes,  more  or  less  stringently,  all  who  do  not 
agree  with  it  on  these  points. 

§.  6.  There  seems  to  be  a  precept  in  the  Scrip- 
tures for  this  exclusiveness  :  "  Have  no  fellowship  with 
the  unfruitful  works  of  darkness,  but  rather  reprove 


L]  THE    IDENTITY   CONSIDERED.  17 

them."  !    "  Now  we  command  you,  brethren,     Thisexciu- 
in  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  ye  8  * v  en  e  8  8 

seems     war- 

withdraw  yourselves  from  every  brother  that  ranted  by  the 
walketh  disorderly ,  and  not  after  the  tradU  Scr|Plure8- 
tion  which  ye  received  from  us."  2  "A  man  that  is  an 
heretic  after  the  first  and  second  admonition,  reject."  3 
"  If  there  come  any  unto  you  and  bring  not  this  doc- 
trine, receive  him  not  into  your  house,  neither  bid  him 
God  speed."4  "If  he  neglect  to  hear  the  Church  let 
him  be  unto  thee  as  an  heathen  man  and  a  publi- 
can." 5 

$  7.  The  passages  just  cited,  imply  a  rule    This  implies 
or  tradition  after  which  men  are  to  walk,  the  identity  of 
and    the   departure    irom   which   is   called 
wa  I Iking  disorderly. 

We  must,  however,  be  able  to  identify  our  church, 
as  a  visible  society,  with  the  Church  of  which  the 
Scriptures  were  then  speaking,  or  we  have  no  right  to 
exercise  its  discipline,  and  exclude  those  who  do  not 
walk  orderly,  according  to  its  rules  and  traditions. 
Otherwise  we  are  taking  to  ourselves  an  authority 
which  was  never  given  us,  and  are  intruding  ourselves 
into  the  office  of  others. 

Authority  may  be  conferred  upon  an  individual  per- 
sonally, and  then  it  dies  with  him.  Such  were  the 
J'mphcts  under  the  oil  dispensation.  But,  again; 
authority  may  be  conferred  upon  a  class  or  order  of 

WW  ' 

men — as    with   the    Priesthood — and    then    it    belongs 

alike  to  each  one  that   belongs  to  thai  olass,  andasa 
consequence  of  his  regular  admission  to  it.     And  as 

i  Ephea  r.  11.         »8  'll..-^.  iii.fi.  3  Tit.  iii.  i<>. 

4  2  Jcta  10.  •'  Mini.  win.  17. 


jg  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

authority  of  the  first  kind  may  not  be  assumed  by  any 
one  on  whom  it  has  not  been  conferred  individually — 
so  authority  of  the  second  kind  may  not  be  assumed 
or  exercised  by  any  one  until  he  has  been  admitted  to 
the  class  or  order  to  which  it  belongs. 

Now,  exclusiveness  implies  authority  to  exclude. 
In  its  exercise  we  exclude  those  whom  we  judge  to  be 
unworthy,  according  to  the  Scriptures,  from  certain 
religious  privileges,  from  what  we  regard  as  the  Sacra- 
ments and  fellowship  of  the  Church.  It  is  no  trifling 
matter  to  say  to  one  that  he  shall  not  come  to  the 
Lord's  table.  And  yet  that  is  what  we  say  when  we 
refuse  communion  with  any  one,  unless  we  will  admit 
that  our  table,  the  one  from  which  we  exclude  him, 
is  not  the  Lord's. 

If  then,  we  are  of  the  class  of  person's  , to  whom 
these  precepts   of   exclusiveness  were  addressed,  we 
have  a  right  to  exercise  the  authority  to  be  exclusive 
If  not,  the  claim  is  something  worse  than  an  empty 
mockery. 

But  as  the  authority  was  not  conferred  upon  the 
persons  addressed  in  the  Scriptures  individually — for 
then  it  would  have  died  with  them  and  may  now  be 
exercised  by  no  one — but  as  a  class,  as  the  Church  of 
Christ — we  must  identify  ourselves  with  them  before 
we  can  have  even  the  shadow  of  a  right  to  exclude 
any  one  who  chooses  to  come  to  our  communion,  from 
doing  so.  For  it  is  not  merely  communion  with  us — 
but  it  is,  in  our  view  at  least,  communion  with  the 
Lord  in  His  Sacraments  which  we  refuse  to  those 
who  profess  to  be  His  children. 


I]  THE    IDENTITY   CONSIDERED.  19 

§  8.  Again.     There  are  but  few,  if  any,      We   have 
who  will  not  acknowledge,  that  the  Chris-  ^utie9 10  J» 

D    '  form       which 

tian  has  duties  to  perform,  and  that  the  imply  the 
performance  of  them,  if  he  have  opportunity,  J^urc^" 
is  necessary  to  his  salvation.  We  fully  ad- 
mit the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone.  Yet 
we  affirm,  and  we  expect  all  Christians  to  assent  to 
our  affirmation,  that  the  Christian  must  keep  the 
commandments,  and  bring  forth  the  fruit  of  such  good 
works  as  God  has  ordained  for  us  to  walk  in.  I  shall 
not  now  stop  to  inquire  into  the  grounds  of  this  ne- 
cessity of  obligation.  All  persons  will  agree  in  ac- 
knowledging its  existence. 

1.  I  say,  then,  that  we,   as   Christians,  have   the 
duty  of  obedience,  to  them  that  are  over   us  in   the 
Lord,1  which    can   be    performed    only  in   connexion 
with  the  true  Church.     The  command  itself  implies 
that  there  are  some  persons  whom  Christ  hath  set  over 
u-  to   be  our   governors.     And   the   commandment  is, 
that  we  obey  them,  and  not  others  whom  we  may  put 
in  their   stead,  or  who  may  claim  to  be  in  their  place. 
In  human  affairs,  to  obey  the  rightful  officers  of  the 
government  under  which  we  live  is  patriotism,  and  a 
high  virtue.     But   to   obey  others,  who  have   no  such 
authority — and    who  set  themselves   up  as  claiming 
authority — La  not  patriotism,  but  treason  or  rebellion. 
So   in   religion,  Christ    has  appointed  some  to  have 
authority  over  us,  and  He  requires  thai  we  obey  them. 
Obedience   to  them,  therefore,  is  a  duty.     But  obe- 
dience to  others,  in  the  same  matter^  is  a  rejeotion  of 
thnr  authority,  and  therefore  a  sin. 

1  1Ui>.  xiu.  n. 


20     .  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

2.  Again,  the  Lord  has  ordained  that  they  who 
preach  the  Gospel  shall  live  of  the  Grospel.1  And  con- 
sequently He  has  commanded  that  he  that  is  taught  in 
the  Word — minister  unto  him  that  teacheth.2  Here  the 
duty  of  doing  something  for  the  support  of  the  Ministry 
is  expressly  taught.  He  that  gives  for  the  support  of 
the  true  Ministry  in  the  true  Church  performs  this  duty. 
And  the  declaration  is  made,  "  he  that  soweth  little 
shall  reap  little :  and  he  that  soweth  plenteously  shall 
reap  plenteously."3  But  he  that  is  not  in  the  true 
Church,  and  gives  to  the  support  of  another  ministry 
than  that  which  Christ  hath  appointed,  is  not  per- 
forming this  duty.     He  is  rather  doing   its  opposite. 

3.  Once  more — there  are  in  the  Scriptures  a  vari- 
ety of  commands  to  preserve  the  unity  of  the  Church,4 
and  for  this  purpose  to  avoid  all  those  that  cause  di- 
visions and  all  false  teachers.5  Now  it  is  perfectly 
obvious  that  unless  we  are  in  the  true  Church,  we 
cannot  be  performing  this  duty.  But  on  the  contrary 
we  are  continually  committing  the  sin  against  which 
the  commandments  were  directed. 

It  is  obvious  therefore,  that  one  cannot  keep  these 
commandments  of  Grod,  and  perform  the  duties  which 
are  required  of  him,  unless  he  is  in  the  Church.  So 
far  as  these  commandments  and  duties  are  concerned, 
it  is  no  matter  what  is  its  name,  organization,  or  form 
of  government,  whether  it  be  Papal,  or  Episcopal, 
Presbyterian,  Methodist  or  Baptist.  Like  circum- 
cision or  uncircumcision,  these  things  in  themselves 
are  nothing,  but  only  the  keeping  the  commandments. 

1  1  Cor.  ix.  13,  14.  Luke  xxii.  29.        2  Gal.  vi.  6.        3  2  Cor.  ix.  6,  7. 
*  Eph.  vi.  3.  5  Rom.  xvi.  17. 


LJ  THE   IDENTITY  CONSIDERED.  21 

But  these  commandments  and  the  duties  growing  out 
of  them,  do  imply  a  distinction  and  a  difference  be- 
tween the  true  Church  and  the  false  ones.  The  im- 
portance depends  not  upon  the  form  of  the  Church, 
but  upon  its  Identity. 

§  9.  Let  us  pass  now  to  another  topic.    At    Christ's  Per- 

the  close  of  St.  Matthew's  Gospel,  we  find  a  Petual  Pre9" 
"■■"  i    ence     Prom" 

promise  of  Christ's  perpetual  presence  "  al-  ised   to   ma 

ways,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world."1  church. 

Now  so  far  as  our  present  purpose  is  concerned,  it 
is  no  matter  whether  this  promise  was  made  to  a  par- 
ticular order  in  the  ministry  or  not.  Suppose  that  it 
was  made  to  the  Church  at  large,  to  all  of  Christ's 
people — it  is  the  same ;  for  whether,  by  the  terms  of 
the  promise,  He  is  to  be  with  the  ministry  or  with  the 
people,  they  must  be  together,  and  so  in  effect  He  will 
be  with  both.  But  the  promise  that  He  will  be  with 
them,  in  which  way  soever  we  understand  it,  implies 
that  He  will  not  be  elsewhere — that  there  may  be 
gatherings,  and  assemblies,  and  associations  with  which 
He  will  not  be.  The  promise  is  of  a  special  blessing 
to  His  Church.  If  we  are  in  that  Church,  we  shall 
have  that  blessing,  if  we  are  worthy.  But  if  we  form 
another  organization — a  false  church — we  forfeit  that 
blessing,  we  forsake  His  presence.  He  certainly  can- 
not be  with  two  or  more  different  and  opposing  bodies. 
He  cannot  be  contending  and  divided  against  Himself. 
Here,  then,  again  we  see  the  inestimable  impor- 
tance of  the  identity  ofthe  Church.  Be  its  name,  or 
organization  what  it  may,  the  importance  is  the  same. 

It  depends  not  upon  outward  form,  or  local  name, 

1  Matt,  xxviii.  20. 


22  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

but  upon  the  identity  of  that  Church  to  which  the 
blessed  promise  of  Christ's  perpetual  presence  was 
made — to  be  with  it  always,  every  day,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world. 

The  church     4  10.  In  1  Cor.  iii.  16,  St.  Paul  calls  the 

the  Temple  in  ClmYch  ^  Temple  0f  Qod.  He  had  just 
which    is   the  r  •> 

true  Worship,  alluded  to  the  divisions  and  contentions  in 
the  Corinthian  Church — some  preferring  Paul,  some 
A  polios,  and  some  Peter.  He  assures  them  that  these 
men  were  but  the  Ministers  by  whom  they  had  be- 
lieved in  Christ;  they  were  not  founders  of  distinct 
sects,  each  for  himself ;  they  were  laborers  together  in 
building  the  Temple  of  Grod ;  Christ  was  the  only 
foundation,  and  no  man  could  lay  another.  They 
were  not  baptized  into  the  name  of  Paul.  Paul  was 
not  crucified  for  them — therefore  he  could  not  be  a 
foundation.  There  could  be  no  other  foundation  than 
Christ,  and  as  He  was  not  divided,  there  could  be  only 
one  Church  with  Him  for  its  chief  corner-stone  and 
foundation.  "Do  ye  not  know,"  asks  the  Apostle, 
"  that  ye  are  the  Temple  of  Grod,  and  that  the  Spirit  of 
God  dwelleth  in  you  ?  "'  And  again,  the  Apostle  writ- 
ing to  the  Ephesians,  uses  the  Same  figure.  He  says, 
"  Ye  are  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  Apostles  and 
Prophets,  Jesus  Christ  Himself  being  the  chief  corner- 
stone, in  Whom  all  the  building,  fitly  framed  together, 
groweth  unto  an  holy  Temple  in  the  Lord."-2 

Undoubtedly,  this  language  is  figurative.  But  the 
figure  must  have  been  designed  to  mean  something. 
The  Temple  is  that  in  which  dwells  the  Holy  Grhost. 
It  is  also  the  place  in  which  Grod  is  worshipped.    Wor- 

1  1  Cor.  vi.  19.  2  Eph.  il  20,  21. 


I]  THE   IDENTITY   CONSIDERED.  23 

ship  is  the  leading  idea  for  which  Temples  are  built. 
This  must  therefore  have  been  St.  Paul's  meaning. 
And  yet  he  says  that  the  Church — the  true  Church — 
consisting  of  those  who  are  "  built  upon  the  foundation 
of  the  Apostles  and  Prophets,  Jesus  Christ  Himself 
being  the  chief  corner-stone,"  is  the  Temple  of  Grod, 
and  the  Spirit  of  Grod  dwelleth  in  it. 

Now  this  fact  suggests  rather  than  explains,  the 
immense  advantage  that  the  Church  of  which  St. 
Paul  was  then  speaking,  has  over  all  other  societies 
and  associations  of  men.  Herein  is  the  Holy  Grhost, 
and  the  true  worship  of  Grod  ;  and  they  who  are  within 
it,  have  "  fellowship  with  the  Father,  and  with  His 
Son  Jesus  Christ." 

$11.  One  more  thought  on  this  subject:  The  church  a 
The  Church  is  in  several  places  compared  m>'9tical Body- 
to  a  living  body.  In  Romans1  it  is  compared  to  an 
Olive  tree,  and  we  Gentiles  are  said  to  be  grafted  in 
and  to  have  our  life  only  as  scions  that  are  grafted  in, 
from  the  tree  and  stalk  into  which  we  are  grafted.  In 
1  Cor.  xii.  the  Church  is  compared  to  a  Human  Body, 
and  the  individuals  belonging  to  it  to  the  members  of 
the  human  body,  as  ha*hds  and  feet,  head,  ears,  and 
eyes — each  of  which  has  life  in  the  body,  and  only  in 
connection  with  it.  Take  them  away  and  they  are 
dead.  Again,  in  Kphesians  iv.  16,  Christ  is  called 
the.  Head,  and  tin-  Church  His  Body,  and  we  each  and 
Severally  the  members — "fitly  joined  together  and 
oompaoted  by  thai  which  every  joint  Bapplieth" — and, 
it  is  said,  thus  to  grow,  "  to  make  Lnorease  of  the  body 

unto   the  edifying  of  itself  in  love."     And  henee  we 

1  xi.  17. 


24  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

are  said  to  be  "  members  of  His  body,  of  His  flesh,  and 
of  His  bones."1 

These,  again,  are  figurative  expressions,  confessedly 
so.  But,  as  figures,  they  must  have  been  used  to  mean 
something.  They  may  point  to  a  mystery,  as,  indeed, 
St.  Paul  calls  it.2  But  it  is  something  of  great  im- 
portance— some  great  advantage,  that  depends  upon 
membership  in  the  Body — the  Identity  of  the  Church. 
Christ  is  not  divided.  His  Body  is  not  divided.  St. 
Paul  says,  "  There  is  one  Body,"  and  the  advantage 
signified  by  these  obscure  but  frequent  figures,  must, 
therefore,  depend  upon  union  with  the  true  Church — 
which  of  course  implies  its  identity. 

The  com-  §  12.  The  definition  of  the  Church  that  is 
tfteOM  most  °°mmonly  adopted,  says  that "  a  Church 
considered  in  is  a  community  voluntarily  associated  on  the 

relation  to  the  r  i    1  •  c  iij^i/*  t     • 

fore^oin"  to-  foundation  oi  revealed  truth  ior  religious  pur- 
Pics-  poses." 

Now  I  shall  not  at  present  go  into  a  consideration 
of  all  the  points  involved  in  this  definition.  Two  only 
shall  I  notice  in  passing: 

1.  It  changes  the  Scripture  phraseology,  and  is  a 
total  departure  from  it.  The  expression  "  the  Church" 
is  used  in  the  Scriptures  somewhere  from  seventy- 
five  to  an  hundred  times.  But  the  expression  "  a 
Church  "  is  used  once,  and  then  only  in  the  last  member 
of  a  sentence  which  makes  the  expression  as  definite  as 
though  the  definite  article  "  the "  itself  had  been 
used.     The  expression  occurs  in  Eph.  v.  25,  26,  27. 

2.  This  change  of  expressions  from  "  the  Church" 
to  a  Church,"  implies  that  there  are,  or  may  be,  many 

i  Eph.  v.  30.  2  Eph.  v.  32. 


L]  THE    IDENTITY   CONSIDERED.  25 

answering  to  all  the  conditions  of  the  definition.  And 
so  it  is  intended.  The  design  is,  so  to  define  the 
Church  as  to  include  all  the  voluntary  associations 
which  may  have  been  devised  and  called  by  that  name, 
and  which  are  nevertheless  regarded  and  spoken  of  as 
distinct  churches. 

Be  it  so.  Then  each  one  of  them  is  regarded  as 
"  a  Church,"  and  not  as  "the  Church."  The  question 
then  arises,  to  which  of  them  may  we  apply  what  the 
Scriptures  say  of  "  the  Church?"  They  say  nothing 
about  "  a  church,"  which  may  be  only  one  out  of 
many.  Which  one  of  those  many  churches  may  ex- 
ercise the  authority  of  exclusiveness  which  our  Lord 
has  conferred  upon  His  Church  ?  In  which  may  we 
perform  the  duties  we  owe  to  the  Church  of  which  the 
Scriptures  speak?  In  which  is  the  perpetual  presence 
of  Christ  promised  to  His  followers  and  people  ?  Which 
is  the  Temple  where  the  true  and  acceptable  worship 
of  G-od  may  be  offered  ?  Which  is  the  mystical  Body 
in  which,  as  members  of  His  body,  we  may  have  the 
life  of  Christ  flowing  through  our  souls,  and  we  become 
partakers  of  Him  ? 

These  are  grave  and  momentous  questions,  and 
yet  they  are  all  involved  in  the  identity  of  the  Church. 

To  illustrate  this  point  by  a  comparison  which  will 
exhibit  its  force  more  fully,  let  us  suppose  a  writer 
to  be  setting  forth  our  duty  to  God.  Ho  begins  by  a 
definition,  and  says  that  "a  god  is  thai  which  is  ac- 
knowledged  to  be  the  proper  object  of  religious 
worship." 

Now  this  definition  is  such  an  one  as  the  expe- 
rienoeand  praotioesof  men  have  made  true.  It  defines 

9. 


26  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

"  a  god  ;  n  and  does  it  in  such  a  way  as  to  include  the 
true  and  only  Grod  ;  but  so  also  as  to  include  with  Him 
any  idol,  which  the  fancy  of  man  may  devise  or  his 
hands  may  make.  But  may  he  therefore  apply  what 
the  Scriptures  say  of  the  only  true  God,  to  any  being 
or  object  which  men  may  choose  to  acknowledge  to  be 
"  a  god  ?"  If  so,  then  we  can  justify  any  system  of 
idolatry  that  has  ever  existed,  or  that  man  may  choose 
to  invent;  and  the  command  "  thou  shalt  worship  the 
Lord  thy  Grod,"  may  be  applied  to  Jupiter,  Baal,  or 
Vishnu,  just  according  as  we  may  choose  to  have  the 
one  or  the  other  for  the  "  Lord  our  god."  As  there  are 
"  gods  many,  and  lords  many,"  so  there  are  "churches 
many."  And  as  the  Scriptures  speak  of  the  Eternal 
Jehovah  as  "  the  Grod  "  whom  we  ought  to  worship,  so 
do  they  speak  of  that  Church  which  our  Lord  and  His 
Apostles  founded,  as  "  the  Church,  "  that  is,  the  only 
one  in  which  we  can  perform  our  duties  and  obligations 
to  the  Church,  and  enjoy  the  blessings  and  privileges 
promised  to  it. 

conclusion.  §  13.  Now  we  have  seen  that,  as  Chris- 

tians, we  are  commanded  to  obey  those  that  Christ  has 
appointed  to  have  the  rule  over  us.1  We  are  to  esteem 
them  very  highly  in  love  for  their  work's  sake,  the 
Lord  has  ordained  that  they  shall  live  of  the  Grospel,3 
and  we  that  are  taught  are  commanded  to  minister  to 
their  support  in  all  good  things ; 4  we  are  to  mark  and 
avoid  all  those  that  cause  divisions,6  and  strive  to  pre- 
serve the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace.6 
We  may  place  a  very  different  estimate  upon  these 

i  Heb.  xiii.  17.  2  1  Thess.  v.  12.  3  1  Cor.  ix  14. 

*  GaL  vi.  6.  6  Rom.  xvi  17.  6  Eph.  iv.  3. 


I.]  THE    IDENTITY   CONSIDERED.  27 

duties.  Some  may  deny  that  they  are  duties  at  all. 
It  is  true  that  many  act  as  though  they  did  not  con- 
sider them  so.  But  surely  such  persons  cannot  have 
taken  their  views  from  the  Word  of  God.  Duties  at 
any  rate  they  are,  if  the  Bible  is  to  be  our  standard  and 
rule,  whether  we  consider  them  of  a  greater  or  of  a 
lesser  magnitude. 

We  must  admit,  then,  that  there  are  duties  which 
we,  as  Christians,  are  required  to  perform,  that  can 
be  performed  only  in  the  Church,  and  which  do,  there- 
fore, imply  its  Identity.  Grant  that  elsewhere  we 
may  have  the  rule  of  life  and  duty  truly  explained  to 
us  ;  grant  that  elsewhere  we  may  enjoy  the  presence 
and  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  grant  that  elsewhere 
we  may  have  all  the  joy  and  peace  of  believing :  yet 
there,  be  it  where  it  may,  these  duties  must  remain 
unperformed — the  members  must  go  down  to  the  grave, 
leaving  them  undone — they  must  arise  with  us  at  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  appear  with  us,  as  deeds 
done  or  not  done  in  the  body,  at  the  Judgment  Seat  of 
God.  The  true  faith  which  we  received— the  right 
rule  of  life  which  was  expounded  to  us — the  fellowship 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  which  we  supposed  we  enjoyed — as 
well  as  all  our  joy  and  peace  in  believing — these,  and 
all  the  other  privileges  of  light  and  knowledge  which 

We  DiaV  have  possessed  and  enjoyed,  can  only  serve  to 

render  ns  inexcusable  i'<>r  the  oegleot  of  these  duties, 
and  aggravate  our  <niilt.  There  they  stand,  in  the 
Lamb's  books,  written  againsi  our  names,  as  things 
l.-i't  undone,  which  we  ought  to  have  done.  It  will  then 
be  found  thai  we  had  bestowed  upon  others  thai  which 

God  had  required  for  lliinxlf    We  had  conferred  upon 


28  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  Chap. 

others  that  honor  which  He  required  to  be  paid  to  His 
servants.  We  had  scattered  where  He  would  gather 
together  into  one  Fold.  We  had  multiplied  and  en- 
couraged divisions,  instead  of  laboring  and  praying,  as 
He  did,  that  His  disciples  might  be  one,  and  that  as 
the  Apostle  says  He  designed,  "  there  might  be  no 
schisms  in  the  body." 

I  do  not  wish  to  magnify  the  importance  of  these 
things  at  all.  I  aim  simply  to  call  attention  to  them, 
as  indubitable  facts  tending  to  show  the  importance  of 
the  Identity  of  the  Church.  Let  each  judge  for  him- 
self of  their  importance,  and  as  he  judges  so  let  him 
act.  To  his  own  Master  he  standeth  or  falleth  ;  for 
we  shall  all  stand  before  the  Judgment  Seat  of  Christ, 
and  every  one  of  us  shall  give  account  of  himself  to 
God.  But  I  refer  to  these  facts  as  being  in  part  the 
reason,  and  as  being  in  themselves  a  sufficient  reason 
for  the  importance  which  we  attach  to  the  Identity  of 
the  Church  and  for  our  esteeming  one  church,  better 
than  another,  even  though  they  should  seem,  in  the 
judgment  of  men,  both  equally  orthodox,  both  equally 
holy  in  the  lives  of  their  members — both,  so  far  as  we 
can  see,  equally  salutary  in  the  influence  which  they 
exert  upon  the  morals  and  welfare  of  the  community. 
To  man  they  may  present  the  aspect  of  equal  value 
and  equal  holiness.  But  in  their  relation  to  Grod  they 
cannot  be  considered  as  on  the  same  footing. 

The  reader  will  not  therefore  understand  me  as 
seeking  to  prove  either  directly  or  indirectly — Epis- 
copacy and  the  Apostolic  Succession.  I  am  aiming  to 
find  that  Church  to  which  we  owe  so  many  duties, 
and  in  which  we  may  enjoy  so  many  privileges.     As 


L]  THE   IDENTITY   CONSIDERED.  29 

Christians,  we  must  have  membership  somewhere. 
We  must  assemble  for  Public  Worship — for  keeping 
the  Christian  Sabbath — for  observance  of  the  Sacra- 
ments— and  for  the  performance  of  other  commanded 
duties,  which  require,  or  imply,  a  visible  association, 
or  church,  of  professing  followers  of  Christ. 

And  I  aim  at  tracing  the  history  of  the  Church, 
irrespective  of  the  peculiarities  of  its  organization,  or 
to  the  doctrines  which  it  may  have  taught.  In  writing 
a  history  of  the  descendants  of  Shem,  for  instance — 
the  oldest  son  of  Noah — we  should  not  need  to  inquire 
into  the  forms  of  government  under  which  they  may 
have  lived,  or  into  the  peculiarities  of  religious  belief 
which  they  may  have  entertained  ;  but  we  follow  them 
historically,  showing  from  history  where  they  started 
from,  whither  they  wandered,  and  the  places  in  which 
they  located.  And  then  again  from  each  such  settle- 
ment we  might  find  colonies  removing  to  become  the 
founders  of  a  nation  or  distinct  community,  somewhere 
else.  Wherever  they  might  go,  whatever  changes 
might  be  made  in  their  mode  of  life,  their  form  of  civil 
government,  their  opinions  and  usages  on  religious 
subjects — still  if  they  should  keep  themselves  aloof  and 
distinct  from  intermarriage  with  the  other  branches  of 
the  Noachiiin  family,  we  could  trace  their  descent  and 
identify  them  as  the  family  and  descendants  of  Shem. 

So  undoubtedly  the  Church  may  be  traced  and 
identified.  It  began  in  the  little  Hock  which  our 
blessed  Lord  gathered  around  Him  during  His  sojourn 
on  earth.  Into  this  family  new  members  received 
adoption  by  embracing  and  professing  the  Faith.  \s 
a  body  of  professors  they  kept  themselves  distinct  from 


30  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap.  L 

all  others,  by  their  discipline  and  the  administration 
of  their  Sacraments.  And  they  extended  themselves 
from  Judea  and  Jerusalem,  in  all  directions,  as  the  Lord 
had  commanded  them.  Their  history  is  before  us. 
It  is  from  this  that  we  propose  to  draw  our  materials 
for  identifying  the  Church. 

The  Church  of  which  we  are  in  pursuit,  and  which 
we  are  endeavoring  to  identify,  is  properly  distin- 
guished .from  all  others  by  the  title,  Catholic.  It  is 
the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ.  The  word  "  Catho- 
lic "  means,  whole,  general,  universal.  "  It  is  so  called," 
says  an  ancient  Father,  "  because  it  is  spread  over 
the  whole  habitable  globe,  from  one  end  to  the  other." 

"We  may  then  speak  of  this  expanded  and  diffused 
society  of  Christ's  Disciples,  as  a  whole,  -and  call  it  the 
Catholic  Church.  Or  we  may  speak  of  it  in  any  par- 
ticular nation,  and  call  it  the  Catholic  Church  in 
that  nation ;  as  the  Catholic  Church  in  France,  the 
Catholic  Church  in  England,  &c.  But  in  either  case, 
whether  we  use  it  of  the  whole,  or  only  a  part,  we 
mean,  if  we  speak  of  the  whole  body,  that  Church 
which  has,  visibly  and  apparently,  existed  ever  since 
it  was  founded  by  our  Blersed  Lord  and  His  Apostles  ; 
and  if  we  speak  of  a  part  or  local  division,  then  that 
of  which  we  speak  is  the  part  or  local  division  of  that 
Church  existing  in  any  particular  place.  But  the 
title,  Catholic,  as  I  shall  use  it,  is  intended  to  indicate 
only  this  one  fact,  or  idea,  namely :  the  Church,  or 
Society,  instituted  by  our  Lord  and  continued  in  its 
existence  to  this  day,  or  some  part  of  it,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  all  others  of  a  different  and  more 
modern  origin. 


CHAPTER  II. 


THE     MODE     OF    HISTORIC     IDENTIFICATION      STATED     AND 

ILLUSTRATED. 

Now,  in  order  to  identify  the  Church,  it  is  obvious 
that  we  may  take  two  different  methods.  We  may 
ascertain  from  the  Scriptures,  what  are  to  be  regarded 
as  its  essential  Notes,  and  then  institute  a  comparison 
between  those  notes,  or  features,  and  any  given  body 
claiming,  at  this  day,  to  be  the  Church,  or  a  branch  of 
it.  Or  we  may  go  back  to  the  first  planting  of  the 
Church,  and  trace  its  existence  down  the  current  of 
time,  in  its  spread  over  the  face  of  the  earth,  until  we 
find  it  extending  itself  into  our  own  country.  The 
former  method  is  the  most  common  in  our  day — and 
lias  involved  us  in  interminable  discussions  upon  the 
preliminary  matters,  which  are  merely  Notes  of  the 
Church,  and  thus  keep  us  back  from  the  subject  itself ; 
and  even  when  the  question  has  been  decided,  it  leaves 
the  appearance  of  making  the  whole  matter  depend 
upon  a  question  of  mere  form. 

§  1.  1  shall  take  the  last  of  the  two  methods    »■  Htol0* 

cal         Method 

indicated    above.      This  would  be  very  easy  mated       and 

if  the  infirmities,  the  follies,  and  the  wilful-  ill">ln,,'"L 

ness  of  men  had  not  encumbered  tin;  subject  with  <m- 

barrassmentd  which  render  a  more  cautious  procedure 

and  a  more  careful   investigation   necessary. 


32  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Let  us,  then,  endeavor  to  get  a  definite  idea  of  the 
Identity  of  the  Church.  And  for  this  purpose,  perhaps 
a  few  illustrations  from  other  subjects  will  be  of  the 
most  important  service. 

There  is,  for  instance,  such  an  institution  as  Ma- 
sonry. I  say  nothing  of  its  merits,  or  demerits,  but 
simply  refer  to  its  existence  as  an  illustration  in  point. 
It  has  existed,  through  several  centuries  at  least,  one 
and  the  same  institution.  It  is  spread  extensively 
over  the  face  of  the  earth.  It  is  the  same  institution, 
in  all  the  nations  where  it  has  an  existence  at  all.  In 
separate  towns  and  villages  there  are  distinct  Lodges, 
each  with  its  officers,  its  Lodge-room,  &c.  He  that 
joins  any  one  of  these  Lodges  is  a  Mason,  there  and 
everywhere.  In  any  other  Lodge,  in  any  other  nation, 
he  would  be  received,  as  a  free  and  accepted  Mason,  to 
the  same  standing  and  degree  as  that  which  he  had  at 
the  place  where  he  resided.  This  is  because  of  the 
identity  of  the  institution.  It  is  one  and  the  same 
everywhere. 

If,  now,  several  individuals,  in  a  settlement  where 
there  is  no  lodge,  believing  the  institution  to  be  a  good 
one,  become  desirous  of  joining  the  Masons,  and  hav- 
ing a  lodge  where  they  reside,  there  are  certain  rules 
and  principles  of  extension  by  which  they  can  obtain 
their  object.  They  must  first  go  in  sufficient  num- 
bers and  be  regularly  initiated  into  some  Lodge  already 
in  existence ;  and  having  been  initiated  themselves, 
they  may  obtain  a  charter  or  dispensation,  and  go  to 
work  under  it.  In  this  way  they  become  truly  Ma- 
sons— their  association  is  a  Lodge.  They  derive  all 
the  benefits,  whatever  they  may  be,  of  this  ancient 


II]  MODE    OF   HISTORIC    IDENTIFCATION.  33 

institution,  from  their  connection  with  the  Lodge  which 
they  have  founded.  And  they  are  Masons  the  world 
over.  In  any  Lodge,  in  any  city  or  nation,  they  would 
be  received  to  the  same  standing,  and  entitled  to  the 
same  privileges.  But  if  they  had  gone  to  work  other- 
wise than  as  these  principles  of  extension  require,  or 
got  up  a  clandestine  lodge,  they  would  not  have  become 
Masons — their  association  would  not  have  been  recog- 
nised as  a  Lodge  at  all — nor  would  they  themselves 
have  received  any  of  the  benefits  which  would  result 
to  them  from  being  Masons — for,  in  fact,  the  course 
which  they  took  did  not  make  them  Masons,  but  only 
imitators  of  Masons. 

The  same  illustration  may  be  derived  from  the 
Odd  Fellow's  institution — from  that  of  the  Sons  of 
Temperance — the  Rechabites,  &c. 

As  this  is  an  important  point,  I  will  venture  one  or 
two  more  illustrations :  and  especially  so  because  each 
individual  will  understand  it  the  better  if  I  give  as  an 
illustration  something  that  he  has  known  in  his  experi- 
ence or  that  has  occurred  to  his  own  thoughts. 

Take,  then,  for  another  illustration,  the  American 
Bible  Society  ;  an  association  which,  while  it  is  chiefly 
designed  for  doing  good  to  others,  confers  benefits  and 
privilriri-s  upon  its  members.  This  society  was,  I 
believe,  first  established  in  New- York.  It  has  a  written 
constitution,  established  modes  of  operation,  and  estab- 
lished principles  <>r  provisions,  for  extension  by  means 
ol"  auxiliary  associations,  which  may  be  formed  in  every 
County,  town,  or  parish.  If  individuals,  residing  in  a 
place  where  there  is  no  auxiliary  Society,  arc  desirous 

of  establishing  one,  they  have  only  to  ascertain  what 


*)* 


34  THE   CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

are  the  rules  that  are  laid  down  by  the  parent  society, 
and  strictly  conforming  themselves  to  those  rules  in 
their  organization,  they  become  thereby  members  of 
the  American  Bible  Society.  They  are  entitled  to  all 
the  benefits  arising  from  such  membership,  and  can  do 
all  the  good  which  it  enables  them  to  accomplish. 

But  if  they  proceed  otherwise  than  according  to 
those  established  rules,  they  may  indeed  form  them- 
selves into  a  Bible  Society — one  that  may  confer  bene- 
fits upon  its  members,  and  enable  them  to  do  good  by 
the  circulation  of  the  Bible — but  still  they  will  not  be 
members  of  the  American  Bible  Society,  nor  will  their 
association  be  one  that  is  auxiliary  to,  or  a  part  of,  that 
older  and  more  extensive  institution,  but  only  an  imi- 
tation of  it. 

Now  this  same  thing  must  hold  true  with  regard 
to  the  Church.  Our  blessed  Redeemer  contemplated 
founding  a  Church,  that  should  extend  over  the  whole 
earth  and  last  as  long  as  the  world  stands.1  But  it  is 
evident  that  He  did  not  Himself  establish  it  in  all 
places.  Neither  was  it  established  in  all  places  and 
nations  by  His  immediate  Apostles,  during  their  life- 
time. There  must  therefore,  be  certain  principles  on 
which  its  extension  depends,  and  by  which  it  may  be 
extended;  so  that  where  a  number  of  persons,  who 
are  already  Christians,  or  who  are  desirous  of  becom- 
ing so,  are  found,  a  society  may  be  formed  in  accordance 
with  those  principles,  and  becomes  thereby  part  of  His 
Church,  and  not  merely  an  imitation  of  it. 

Every  society  that  is  intended  to  outlast  the  gen- 
eration in  which  it  is  instituted,  and  to  be  extended 

1  Matt.  xvi.  18. 


IL]  MODE  OF   HISTORIC   IDENTIFICATION.  30 

beyond  the  immediate  locality  where  it  was  first  or- 
ganized, must  have  principles  of  extension,  by  which 
it  can  be  expanded  and  located  elsewhere.  Else  of 
course  it  could  not  be  extended  at  all.  By  ascertain- 
ing these  principles,  we  are  able  to  follow  the  society 
in  its  spread,  and  identify  its  existence  in  each  par- 
ticular place.  The  Church,  like  a  vine,  the  root  of 
which  is  at  the  place  of  its  first  establishment — Jeru- 
salem— puts  forth  its  branches  into  each  city,  province, 
or  nation,  until  they  spread  over  the  face  of  the  whole 
inhabited  globe,  and  its  tendrils  reach  every  human 
heart.  Now  a  vine  is  one.  Though  it  may  have  many 
branches,  yet  we  find  no  difficulty  in  identifying  them. 
We  can  trace  each  one  back  till  it  articulates  with  the 
main  stalk  and  so  through  that  stalk  to  the  original 
root,  in  a  continuous  line  of  unbroken  succession.  Or, 
in  case  we  start  with  a  branch  that  does  not  belong  to 
the  same  vine,  we  can  trace  it  back  to  its  separate 
root  and  tell  where  it  started  from,  ascertain,  perhaps, 
by  whom  it  was  planted,  and  at  any  rate,  we  can  thus 
prove  that  it  is  not  a  branch  of  the  same  vine.  In 
tracing  the  vine,  however,  we  may  find  here  a  branch 
ornsbed  and  deformed  by  violence,  there  one  overlayed 
by  mildew  and  rust — here  one  blighted  by  dearth  or 
choked  by  the  growth  of  noxious  weeds — and  then, 
again,  we  may  possibly  find  one  on  which  man  has 

grafted  scions  of  a  different  stock  so  as  to  produce  fruits 

of  a  differenl  character.     Bui  through  all.  its  identity 

can  be  traced  :  it  is  the  same  vine  still.     So  with  the. 

Church — violence  has  been  at  work  upon  her  sacred 
principle mb  ;md  lineaments;  superstition  lias  overlaid 
her  simple  truths  and  simple  forms  ;   apathy  and  world- 


36  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

liness  have  blighted  her  fruits,  and  the  invention  of 
man  has  been  busy  with  efforts  to  engraft  its  own 
multifarious  schemes  upon  that  which  is  the  only  life- 
giving  stalk.  But  the  Church's  historic  identity  can 
be  traced  through  them  all. 

§  2.  It  is  comparatively  easy  to  trace  the 
their  origin,  identity  of  the  Church  in  those  places  where 
anTconfes^d  ^  was  established  by  the  inspired  Apostles, 
to  be  new  and  continues  with  an  uninterrupted  sue- 
cession  to  the  present  day.  The  admission 
of  members  from  generation  to  generation,  so  as  to 
keep  the  numbers  good — the  keeping  of  Sundays  and 
other  Holy  Days,  in  religious  worship — the  observance 
of  the  Sacraments — meeting  habitually  in  the  'same 
place — calling  itself  always  by  the  same  name — and 
various  other  notes,  guide  us,  without  fear  or  danger 
of  mistake.  And  as  a  matter  of  fact,  though  we  find 
the  enemy  has  always  been  busy  at  work  in  creating 
divisions  and  schisms,  yet,  in  the  places  of  which  we 
now  speak,  there  has  never  been  any  difficulty  in  de- 
ciding which  was  the  old  Church,  and  which  the  new 
sect.  There  may  have  been  much  difference  of  opin- 
ion as  to  which  was  the  soundest  and  best,  the  old 
Church  or  the  new  one,  but  none  as  to  the  fact,  which 
was  the  old  and  which  the  new.  In  other  words,  the 
Identity  of  the  body  has  never  been  a  matter  of  doubt 
or  dispute.  In  all  the  earlier  controversies — the  Arian, 
the  Donatist,  the  Pelagian,  and  the  Nestorian — there 
was  no  doubt,  no  question  raised  that,  these  sects  were 
the  more  recent  bodies.  They,  of  course,  all  claimed 
to  be  right.  But  no  one  of  them  claimed  to  be  the 
Church  that  had  existed  from  Christ  and  the  Apostles. 


IT]  MODE    OF    HISTORIC   IDENTIFICATION.  37 

Their  plea  was,  that  the  Church  had  fallen  into  error 
and  corruption,  and  that  they  were  reformers.  And 
so  they  were,  if  they  had  truth  on  their  side,  so  long 
as  they  continued  in  the  Church.  But  when  they 
left  it  to  form  a  new  one,  that  which  they  formed  was  a 
new  one,  and  that  which  they  left  was  the  old.  So,  also, 
with  the  modern  sects — the  Presbyterians,  the  Inde- 
pendents, and  the  Methodists — in  England.  There  is 
no  pretence  that  any  one  of  them  is  the  Church  that 
existed  in  England  before  the  Reformation.  It  is  fully 
and  freely  acknowledged  that  they  are  new  churches, 
formed  by  individuals  seceding  from  the  old. 

♦  3.  Now  such  facts  do  not  at  all  embarrass  2*?°?? 

attended  with 

us  in  our  attempts  to  identify  the  Church  in  difficulty  onij 
those  countries  where  it  was  planted  in  the  ^on^cou^ 
earlier  ages — that  is,  in  ages  so  early  as  that  t"es  recently 

.  .  •         i     i_  l  j  converted. 

no  mere  sect  that  then  existed,  has  lasted 
down  to  our  own.  The  Church  that  was  planted  there, 
and  has  outlived  all  schisms,  and  sects,  and  oppositions, 
is  undoubtedly  and  unquestionably  the  one  of  which 
we,  are  in  pursuit.  It  may  be  somewhat — nay,  sadly 
— changed  in  doctrinal  character  and  general  appear- 
ance, l.ut,  historically,  and  lineally,  it  is  the  same. 

The  difficulty  presses  upon  us  only  when  we  come 
to  identify  the  Church  in  these  latter  ages,  when  sects 
ire  abundant,  and  where,  until  lately,  the  name  of 

Christ   had  not   been  heard.      Though   late  in  reaching 

ns,  a  branch  of  the  Vine  maj  have  found  (and  we  trust 

has    found)  its  way  to  our   country.      In   studying  the 
history  of  the  Church,  we  shall  find  that  it  was  never 

inactive.     The  Vine  was  always  growing,  always  put- 
ting forth  new  branches,     The    Northern   nations  of 


38  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Europe — Sweden  and  Norway — were  not  converted 
until  the  tenth  or  eleventh  centuries.  Yet  at  length  a 
branch  of  the  Yine  reached  them  also.  So  with  us. 
Therefore  we  want  some  clue,  or  guide,  by  which  we 
can  trace  the  connection  and  identify  the  body. 

Now,  to  accomplish  this  object,  I  propose  to  ascer- 
tain, in  the  first  place,  what  are  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciples of  the  extension  of  the  Church,  as  we  find  them 
in  the  Scriptures,  and  apply  those  principles  to  the  facts 
of  history.  I  propose  to  inquire,  first,  how  the  Church 
was  extended  and  expanded  by  the  Apostles,  into  other 
countries  than  that  where  it  was  first  established. 
The  method  $  4.  The  method  which  I  propose  to  pur- 
now   prefer  sue  js  one  wjth  which  we  are  familiar  in 

red    adopted       .  .  _ 

and  used  in  similar  cases.  For  instance,  the  Baptist  sect 
aii     similar  first  established,  m  the  Lnited  States, 

casea.  '  ' 

at  Providence,  R.  I.,  a.  d.  1639.  Since  that 
time  it  has  spread  over  almost  the  whole  country.  Yet 
we  have  no  difficulty  in  identifying  it.  "We  are  willing 
to  go  by  the  name,  until  we  learn  that  there  are  several 
sects  claiming  the  same  name.  We  then  resort  to 
their  principles  of  extension,  and  to  the  acknowledg- 
ment of  communion.  They  have  principles  by  which 
their  church  can  be  extended  indefinitely.  Persons 
residing  in  a  place  where  there  is  no  society  of  that 
communion,  have  only  to  ascertain  those  principles, 
organize  accordingly,  and  they  are  acknowledged  by 
the  general  body  of  Baptists,  and  received  by  them 
into  communion,  and  become  thereby  identified  with 
them — a  branch  of  the  same  vine,  a  church  of  Bap- 
tists or  a  part  of  the  Baptist  church. 

The  same  may  be  said  of  any  other  denomination 


IL]  MODE  OF   HISTORIC    IDENTIFICATION.  39 

in  this  country.  It  has  its  principles  of  extension. 
When  in  the  formation  of  new  religious  societies,  de- 
signed to  belong  to  any  existing  communion,  the 
people  forming  it  conform  to  the  rules  and  organic 
principles  of  that  denomination,  they  become  a  part  of 
it,  and  as  a  religious  body  are  identified  with  it.  But 
if  they  do  not  conform  to  those  principles,  they  form  a 
new  denomination — at  first  by  themselves  :  but,  in  the 
course  of  time,  others  may  adopt  their  rules  and  prin- 
ciples, build  on  the  same  platform,  and  then  they  will 
become  a  part  of  the  same  church.  And  in  writing 
the  history  of  that  denomination,  we  must  first  learn, 
from  a  study  of  its  principles  of  extension,  what  we  are 
to  regard  as  a  part  of  it,  and  what  not ;  that  is,  we 
must  identify  it. 

Now  this  is  what  I  propose  to  do  with  regard  to  the 
Church  of  Christ — the  visible  society  of  believers  which 
He  founded.  We  cannot  always  be  guided  by  the 
name  ;  for  that  is  not  always  an  infallible  guide.  We 
must  then  follow  the  Vine  historically,  and  trace  its 
progress  as  it  extends  itself  into  different  countries  and 
thus  identify  its  existence  irrespective  of  its  name. 
Ami  in  order  to  do  this,  we  must,  in  the  first  place,  as- 
oertain  the  manner  in  which,  or  the  principles  by 
which,  it  was  extended. 

$.  5.  I  have,  said  that  this  method'is  one  T1)is  nu.tIlod 
with  which  we  arc  already  familiar.     All  (l*-- ,;i"""1  hr  nl'- 

.,..,.  ,  Jected    to   by 

Dominations   u^i  it  in   tlinr  own  case,  anil 


anv. 


therefore  no  one  can  object  to  its  use  here. 
There  is  n<>t  one  of  the  fifty  or  sixty  denominations  of 
this  land  thai  is  not  extending  its  communion,  <>r  at 
Leasl  seeking  tb  do  so,  bj  establishing  societies  in  places 


40  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

where  there  are  none  of  their  order.  And  when  such  a 
society  is  established,  they  ascertain,  in  some  way  or 
other,  that  it  has  been  established  on  their  own  prin- 
ciples, and  in  conformity  to  their  general  usages, 
before  they  receive  it  into  their  communion.  They  all 
have  representative  bodies,  or  councils,  under  the  name 
of  Conference,  Presbytery,  Convention,  Association, 
Convocation,  Synod,  Classis,  or  something  of  the  kind  ; 
and  when  any  newly  formed  society  seeks  admission 
to  their  deliberations,  &c,  they  examine,  (if  they  have 
not  been  sufficiently  assured  before,)  and  see  if  the 
society  has  been  organized  in  conformity  to  their 
principles  and  usages.  If  so,  they  gladly  grant  the 
admission  which  it  seeks.  But  if  not,  the  admission 
is  withheld.  If  it  yields  up  the  points  of  difference, 
and  conform,  it  is  well.  But  if  not,  and  its  members 
persist  in  their  peculiarities,  they  constitute  thereby  a 
new  denomination — a  new  church.  Their  act  becomes 
a  fact  of  history.  It  neither  violates  the  identity  ot 
the  denomination  previously  existing,  nor  does  it 
throw  any  serious  difficulty  in  the  way  of  our  efforts  to 
identify  it. 

Whatever,  therefore,  we  may  think  of  the  result  of 
our  application  of  the  organic  principles  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  to  the  facts  of  history,  we  are,  all  of  us, 
prohibited  by  our  own  acts — acts  indispensable  to  our 
distinct  existence — from  pronouncing  the  method  un- 
sound or  unjust.  And  in  taking  this  course,  it  seems 
to  me  no  small  gain  that  we  avoid  all  of  the  appearance, 
as  well  as  the  reality,  of  making  Church-communion 
depend  upon  a  mere  form,  or  incidental  fact.  It  car- 
ries all  along  with  it  the  impression  that  it  is  not  a 


II]  MODE   OF   HISTORIC   IDENTIFICATION.  41 

mere  form  that  we  are  seeking,  but  the  Church  itself — 
the  mystical  body  of  Christ — the  fellowship  of  the 
Apostles  and  Martyrs — the  communion  of  those  who 
have  been  sanctified — the  Temple  of  His  Worship — 
the  participation  of  His  promised  presence — the  Flock 
that  He  feeds,  and  the  Fold  of  His  watchful  care. 

$  6.  The  principles  by  which  the  Church  The  princi- 
was  extended  over  the  face  of  the  earth,  J^9 ^^.^ 
must  be  inferred  partly  from  the  acts  of  the  extended  must 
Apostles,  in  extending  it,  and  partly  from  the  fromtneS"rip. 
precepts  and  principles  scattered  through  the  lure8« 
New  Testament,  more  or  less  directly  applicable  to 
the  subject. 

The*  principles  that  I  shall  call  attention  to,  are,  (1) 
that  the  Church  must  be  extended  by  living  members, 
(2)  going  into  a  place  where  the  Church  was  not  pre- 
viously established,  (3)  for  the  purpose  of  preaching 
the  true  Faith,  and  establishing  the  Communion  of  the 
Church  there.  Of  these  principles  we  will  speak  in 
order. 

$  7.  The  charge  or  commission  which  our    first  Pr1n. 

*  CIPLK  *  tllO 

Saviour  gave  His  Apostles,  just  as  he  was  Clmrch  mu3t 
leaving   the    world— "  Go  ye  into    all   the  *    ***** 

o  "*  by  persona 

World,  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature,  who  are  in  its 
teach  or  make  disciples  of  all  nations,  bap-  mmumon- 
Using  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  teaching  them  to  observe 
all  things  whatsoever  1  have  commanded  you,wl — raises 
the  presumption  that  the  Church  was  to  be  established 
and  extended  by  persons  who  had  previously  been  re- 

1  Mark  xvL  15;  Mutt,  xxviii.  20. 


42  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

ceived  as  members,  and  acknowledged  to  have  authority 
in  it.  No  question  will  be  raised,  I  presume,  that  this 
commission,  and  the  duties  assigned  the  Apostles,  did 
at  the  least  include  the  establishing  or  extension  of  the 
Church  which  He  had  before  declared  that  He  would 
build.1  He  did  not  send  the  Apostles  to  preach  the 
Grospel  and  leave  the  converts  to  organize  a  church  or 
not,  as  they  might  choose,  and  in  such  a  way  as  they 
might  choose.  He  did  not  charge  them  to  commit  the 
Grospel  to  writing  and  leave  the  people  to  study  it  for 
themselves,  and  then  act  as  they  might  think  it  required. 
The  duties  of  the  new  life  to  which  the  converts  were 
called,  required  some  society,  association,  or  organiza- 
tion. The  Church  was  not  a  mere  matter  of  choice  or 
expediency  :  it  had  an  end  in  view :  it  was  a  necessary 
element  of  His  religion.  It  was  for  the  support  of 
Public  Worship ;  the  administration  of  the  Sacraments ; 
the  comfort,  fellowship  and  edification  of  its  members. 
Therefore  the  Apostles  were  to  establish  it,  and  enlarge 
its  extension  as  fast  and  as  far  as  converts  should  be 
made  to  resort  to  it,  and  live  in  its  communion.  It 
was  a  voluntary  association,  only  as  all  duties  are 
voluntary.  We  may  perform  them  or  not  as  we 
choose,  but  if  we  do  not  perform  them,  we  must 
abide  the  penalty  of  disobedience.  They  are  not,  and 
cannot  be  indifferent  in  themselves ;  nor  does  this 
obligation  arise  from  our  consent  to  perform  them. 
They  are  duties,  because  some  one  having  authority  so 
to  do,  has  commanded  or  required  them.  So  the  Church 
originated  in  the  will  of  Grod,  and  union  with  it  is  a 

1  Matt.  xvi.  18. 


IL]  MODE   OF  HISTORIC   IDENTIFICATION.  43 

part  of  the  duty  that  He  requires  of  us.  It  depends 
upon  our  wills  whether  we  do  as  He  requires  or  not. 
In  this  sense,  the  Church  is  a  voluntary  association, 
and  in  no  other. 

1.  The  thing  to  which  I  wish  first  to  direct  atten- 
tion, is,  the  fact  that  the  Apostles  went  and  did  the 
work  of  founding  and  extending  the  Church  them- 
selves. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  follow  them  as  they  went, 
preaching  the  Gospel,  and  ordaining  Elders  in  every 
Church1  where  converts  to  the  faith  had  been  made  in 
sufficient  numbers  to  sustain  the  continued  worship  of 
God.  The  fact  that  the  living  Preacher  went  first 
with  the  Gospel — not  in  his  hand,  for  it  was  not  then 
committed  to  writing,  but  in  his  heart — is  the  con- 
spicuous and  the  prevailing  rule.  Nor  is  this  commis- 
sion confined  to  the  Twelve ;  for  St.  Paul,  the  chief 
Apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  was  converted  after  the  com- 
mission was  first  given,  and  became  more  efficient 
than  any  of  the  rest,  and  in  no  respect  a  whit  behind 
the  very  chiefest  Apostles.3  We  also  find  Barnabas, 
Timothy,  Titus,  and  others,  laboring  in  the  same  way 
and  sphere,  though  manifestly  in  an  inferior  capacity. 

There  are,  also,  instances  on  record  in  the  Scrip- 
lures  in  which  an  Apostle  did  not  precede  other  efforts 
to  spread  the  GoepeL 

2.  After  the  persecution  that  arose  at  the  time  of 
Bphen'a  martyrdom,  Philip,  who,  as  we  read,  had 

previously  been  appointed  to  some  inferior  offoe  in  the 

Church,3  went    down    t<>   Samaria   and    preached    the 
1  Acta  xiv.  23.  J  2  Cor.  xi.  6.  8  Acts  vl  1-6. 


44  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Gospel.  And  the  people  gave  heed  to  Philip,  hearing 
and  seeing  the  miracles  that  he  wrought.  And  when 
they  believed  and  were  converted,  they  were  baptised 
in  large  numbers.  The  Apostles  yet  abode  at  Jerusa- 
lem :  but  when  they  heard  that  Samaria  had  received 
the  word  of  Grod,  they  sent  down  Peter  and  John,  two 
of  their  number,  who  laid  their  hands  on  the  newly 
baptised  converts,  and  they  received  spiritual  gifts.1 
These  gifts  had  not  before  been  received  by  the  Samar- 
itan converts. 

3.  But  again  :  We  find  that  they  which  were  scat- 
tered abroad  upon  the  persecution  that  arose  about 
Stephen,  travelled  as  far  as  Phenice,  Cyprus  and  Anti- 
och,  preaching  the  Grospel.  Now  who  these  men  were 
we  do  not  know.  We  know  only  that  they  were  not 
Apostles.  But  be  this  as  it  may,  the  narrative  pro- 
ceeds to  say,  that  when  tidings  of  this  came  to  the 
ears  of  the  Church  which  was  at  Jerusalem,  they  sent 
forth  Barnabas,  that  he  should  go  as  far  as  Antioch,  the 
most  distant  place  from  Jerusalem  that  is  mentioned, 
and  so  over  the  whole  country  spoken  of.  When  he 
came  and  saw  the  grace  that  had  been  given  them,  he 
exhorted  them  to  cleave  unto  the  Lord.  And,  as  we 
read,  much  people  was  added  unto  the  Lord.  Imme- 
diately Barnabas  went  for  Saul — or  Paul — and  brought 
him  to  Antioch,  and  they  remained  there  for  a  whole 
year,  and  "  assembled  themselves  with  the  Church, 
and  taught  much  people." 

Hence  we  see  that  the  Church  was  extended  by 
individuals  previously  in  its  communion — sometimes 

1  Acts  viii.  5-7. 


Ii]  MODE   OF   HISTORIC    IDENTIFICATION.  45 

alone,  as  in  the  case  of  Philip,  and  sometimes  in  com- 
panies— going  into  places  where  they  would  be  as 
seed  scattered  in  the  soil  to  spring  up  and  bring  forth 
a  harvest,  or  like  leaven  hid  in  a  lump  until  the  whole 
be  leavened.  Thus  always  each  branch  and  part  of 
the  Church  had  a  historic  and  visible  connection  with 
that  which  existed  before,  and  through  that  Church 
received  the  persons  who  were  to  do  the  work  of  the 
ministry,  among  them.  Wherever  the  Apostles  went, 
they  were  men  who  had  been  set  apart  for  the  Minis- 
try themselves.  And  in  other  cases — as  Samaria  and 
Antioch — the  mother  Church  sent  forth  Apostles  as 
soon  as  they  had  heard  of  the  conversions  in  those 
places  :  to  the  one  Peter  and  John,  and  to  the  other 
Barnabas  and  Paul. 

But  in  no  case  do  we  find  a  society  starting  up  in- 
dependently of  that  which  existed  before,  and  organizing 
themselves  as  "  a  voluntary  association,"  called  or 
recognized  as  a  part  of  the  Church  of  Christ;  the 
gathering  and  organizing  energy  in  all  cases  proceeded 
from  Christ  through  the  Church  itself,  to  each  sep- 
arate branch  and  member. 

$  8.  The   second  principle  of  the  exten-     The  Skc" 

1  *  ,  OND        PRIM  I- 

sion  of  the  Church  seems  to  be,  that,  besides  ri.K  :  ivrw.n* 
perpetuation  by  additions  in  places  where  itjf***^ 

II  J  I  Cum  111  union 

already  exists,  it  must  be  extended  by  es-  otum  amnh 
tablishing  new  branches  in  other  places,  and  ^   B 


n  e  w 


not  bj  estabtishing  dilFerent  branches  in  the  ,,,,mrh  ■"■ 

|0  into  I  plaot 

same  place.  »h.-r.-ii  taaot 

W.    might   follow  the  Apostles,  as  they  JJ^J  ,alab" 
went  from  one  nation  of  province  to  another, 

laboring  for  a  time  in  the  Central  places  of  population 


46  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

and  influence,  and  see  how  in  every  case,  this  rule 
was  observed.  In  this  way  a  great  number  of  dis- 
tinct and  independent  branches  of  the  Church  were 
established,  all  having  the  same  faith,  the  same  hope, 
the  same  rule  of  life,  and  all  partaking  of  the  same 
fellowship,  and  forming  one  and  the  same  communion. 
In  each  place  the  Church  had  to  start  anew,  and 
begin  from  nothing.  At  first,  therefore,  it  would  be 
but  small  in  point  of  numbers.  They  could  all  be  ac- 
commodated in  one  place  of  meeting  and  worship,  and 
they  would  need  no  more.  As  they  increased  in 
numbers,  however,  they  would  need  more  than  one 
place  of  worship.  Other  places  were  provided.  But 
there  were  then  no  divisions  into  parishes  and  sepa- 
rate congregations,  each  with  its  appropriate  minister, 
as  at  the  present  day.  This  division  forms  what  is 
called  the  "  Parochial  System"  and  was  introduced 
after  the  Apostles'  days. 

But  with  or  without  the  Parochial  system,  there 
could  be  no  occasion  for  forming  another  religious  com- 
munion, or  denomination,  in  the  same  place.  With  it, 
the  Church  or  communion  already  established  might 
be  extended  as  far  as  occasion  should  require,  as  is 
done,  by  each  denomination  at  the  present  day,  by 
forming  new  congregations  and  organizing  new  par- 
ishes. Without  it,  all  that  would  be  required  would 
be  to  add  to  the  number  of  places  of  worship,  and  to 
the  number  of  the  Clergy,  as  fast  as  the  increasing 
wants  of  the  community  might  require,  and  leave  the 
members  to  attend  at  which  ever  place  they  might 
choose. 

The   feelings  of  brotherhood,   and    brotherly  love, 


II]  MODE   OF    HISTORIC  IDENTIFICATION.  47 

which  are  so  strongly  inculcated  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  which  the  religion  of  Christ  is  so  peculiarly  cal- 
culated to  produce,  would  dispose  all  the  Christians  in 
each  place,  to  belong  to  the  same  society,  or  church. 
They  would  also  remember  the  Lord's  prayer  that 
they  might  all  be  one,  that  He  might  dwell  in  them 
and  they  in  Him.1  They  would  be  familiar  with  such 
precepts  as  these:  "Let  brotherly  love  continue,"2 
"  Let  us  walk  by  the  same  rule,  let  us  mind  the  same 
thing,"3  "  Be  of  the  same  mind  one  toward  another,"4 
"  Love  as  brethren,"5  "  For  as  the  body  is  one  and 
hath  many  members,  and  all  the  members  of  that  one 
body,  being  many,  are  one  body,  so  also  is  Christ ;  for 
by  one  Spirit  we  are  all  baptised  into  one  body."6 
"  There  is  one  Body  and  one  Spirit,  even  as  ye  are  all 
called  in  one  hope  of  your  calling,  one  Lord,  one  Faith, 
one  Baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  who  is  above 
all,  and  through  all,  and  in  you  all,""1  "That  there 
may  be  one  Fold  and  oim  Shepherd."8 

And,  M  enforcing  these  precepts  of  Divine  truth, 
we  an-  tooonsider  what  is  said  of  the  nature  and  dan- 
gei  of  divisions  ;  M  For  ye  are  yet  carnal — for  whereas 
there  is  among  you  envying  and  strife,  and  divisions, 
arc  ye  m>t  OBJrnal,  and  walk  as  men?  For  while  one 
saitlu  1  am  of  l'aul,  and  another,  I  am  of  Apollos,  are 
ye  not  carnal?"1  "Mark  them  that  cause  divisions 
and  offences  contrary  to  the  doctrine  which  ye  have 

learned,  and  avoid  them,  f«>r  they  that  are  such  serve 
nol  the  Lord  Jesus  Chnst.nu    "There  musl  also  be 

»  John  xvii.  IL  ,J  Heb  xiii.  I.  »  Pl.il.  iii.  If,. 

4  Uom  xii.  La  6  1   Pet  iii.  &  6  1  Cor.  xii.  12,  13. 

1  l'.|li.  Mnlui.v  La  *  1  L\>r.  iii.  o. 
10  Rom.  xvi.  17. 


48  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

heresies  among  you,   that  they  which  are  approved 
may  be  made  manifest."1 

We  need  go  no  farther  to  see  that  all  the  believers 
in  one  place  would  endeavor  to  "  speak  the  same  thing, 
that  there  should  be  no  divisions  among  them,  but  that 
they  should  be  perfectly  joined  together,  in  the  same 
mind  and  in  the  same  judgment."2 

If,  then,  one  Apostle  after  another  should  go  into 
the  same  place,  it  would  be,  as  St.  Paul  says,  only  to 
build  on  the  same  foundation,  to  enlarge  the  borders 
and  edify  the  same  Church.  Each  would  not  be  the 
founder  of  a  sect,  to  be  called  by  his  name,  as  the 
Corinthians  seem  to  have  thought.  And  how  many  so- 
ever the  brethren  might  be,  they  would  make  but  one 
communion  and  fellowship — "  many  members  in  one 
body." 

Such  then  must  be  the  result,  so  long  as  only  those 
who  were  truly  the  Apostles  and  Ministers  of  Christ, 
labored  among  them.  False  Prophets,  false  Apostles 
might  come.  Against  these  they  had  been  sufficiently 
warned.  They  might  deceive  many  and  would  do  so. 
But  the  society  of  followers  which  they  could  establish, 
most  clearly  would  not  be  a  part  or  branch  of  the 
Church  of  Christ. — As  a  visible  society  it  would  be 
totally  distinct. 

And  if  one  should  come,  though  not  a  false  Prophet 
or  Apostle — nay,  though  he  were  an  angel  from 
heaven — and  should  preach  another  gospel — either  in 
the  Church  already  existing  or  for  the  purpose  of 
founding  another — he  must  be  rejected.     In  the  strong 

1 1  Cor.  xl  19.  *  1  Cor.  L  10. 


II]  MODE   OF   HISTOKIC   IDENTIFICATION.  49 

language   of  St.  Paul,  twice  repeated,   "let  him  be 
accursed."1 

This  must  evidently  be  the  meaning  of  the  apostle. 
He  was  not  speaking  of  those  who  professed  to  teach  a 
new  religion,  altogether  distinct  from  and  independent 
of  Christianity,  but  of  those  who  inculcated  a  view  of 
Christianity  inconsistent  with  the  doctrine  of  Justifi- 
cation by  Faith,  which  he  had  taught  them.  By 
"another  gospel"  therefore,  he  must  have  meant 
another  view  of  the  same  gospel ;  for  he  says  of  it, 
that  it  "  is  not  another,"  but  another  view,  or  a  per- 
version, of  the  same. 

There  was  then  no  possible  way  in  which  another 
church  which  should  be  a  distinct  visible  society,  or 
communion,  and  yet  a  true  branch  of  the  Church  of 
Christ,  could  be  established,  in  a  place  where  one  al- 
ready existed,  so  as  to  produce  two  in  a  community. 
( 1 .)  It  could  not  be  produced  by  a  division,  or  secession, 
for  that  is  condemned  as  carnal,  and  not  serving  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  (2.)  It  could  not  be  by  the  coming 
in  among  them  of  false  Apostles  or  Prophets;  for  no 
liety  which  they  could  establish  would  be  any  part 
of  the  Church  of  Christ.  (3.)  It  could  not  be  by  a 
person's  coming  among  them  to  preach  another  gos- 
pel — another  view  of  Christianity — even  though  that 
|ht>«.ii  w.-re  an  Apostle,  or  an  angel  from  heaven;  for 
whoever  should  oome  on  such  an  errand  or  undertake 
luoh  a  work,  must  be  held  "accursed." 

And  indeed  another  gospel  would  be  accessary,  to 
constitute  another  ohuroh.     Por  the  rites  winch  the 


1  Gal  i.  8-9. 


50  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Apostles  were  to  teach  the  disciples  to  observe,  were 
commanded  them  by  our  Lord  no   less  than  the  doc- 
trines which  they  were  to  teach  them  to  believe.     This 
appears  from  the  broad  terms  of  the  mission,  as  record- 
ed by  St  Matthew,1  "teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you : "  and  so 
long  as  this  was  done,  by  all  the  disciples  under  the  in- 
fluence of  those  commands  for  unity,  brotherly  love 
and  fellowship,  and  of  those    warnings  against  divi- 
sions^— some  of  which  we  have  quoted — there  would  be 
no  separate  communions,  or  distinct  denominations,  of 
the  accepted  disciples.     And  all  others,  whether  they 
were  those  that  were  seduced  by  false  prophets  and 
apostles,  or  those   who  had   given  heed  to  some  one 
coming    among    them   preaching    "  another  gospel," 
would  of  course  have  no  claim,  nor  pretension,  to  be 
considered  a  branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 

Hence,  then,  we  may  lay  it  down  as  a  rule  that 
the  Church  was  expanded  or  extended,  not  by  estab- 
lishing different  denominations  in  the  same  place,  but 
by  establishing   the   same  denomination  in  different 

places.  ' 

§  9.  In  the  third  place,  the  persons  going 
third  .  ^  an  un00CUpie(j  field — purely  missionary 

Principle:  r  r  J  j 

Each  new  ground — to  establish  the  Church,  must  go 
bTretabtisiied  f°r  the  purpose  of  establishing  a  branch  oi 
on  the  same  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ,  on  the  same 
sis  and  for  the  basis,  and  for  the  same  object,  as  the  Church 
same  End  as  itgelf>     Thig  basis    •      the  Christian  Faith. 

the  Church  it- 
self was  orig-  And  the  object  is,  the  glory  of  (rod  in  the 

tidied.  GStab  salvation  of  sinners.     These  being  essential 

1  Matt,  xxviii.  20. 


II]  MODE   OF   HISTORIC   IDENTIFICATION.  51 

elements  of  the   Church   and    of   Christianity,   they 
must  of  course,  therefore  be  essential  to  its  Identity. 

St.  Paul  says,  "other  foundation  can  no  man  lay 
than  that  which  is  laid."1  This  foundation  is  the 
Christian  Faith,  as  the  Apostles  taught  it,  and  the 
Church  at  first  received  it. 

I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  every  error  or  mistake  in 
point  of  fact,  will  nullify  or  invalidate  the  labors  of  the 
missionary  who  makes  it.  Such  mistakes  are. inci- 
dent to  human  infirmity,  and  inseparable  from  whatever 
is  to  be  done  by  fallible  man.  But  when  a  missionary, 
or  a  band  of  them,  go  about  to  build  a  church  on  a 
basis  or  foundation  materially  different  from  that 
which  was  the  acknowledged  Creed,  or  Confession  of 
Faith  of  the  Primitive  Church,  the  design  itself  shows 
that  they  intend  to  found  a  new  church — a  new  reli- 
gions communion,  rather  than  to  extend  the  old  one. 
And  such  a  step  would  Lead  to  two  results,  which  would 
make  the  fact  that  a  new  church  had  been  established 
conspicuous  and  generally  admitted.  (1.)  The  new 
church  would  not  be  likely  to  claim  communion  with 
the  eld,  but  would  be  likely,  on  the   other  hand,  to 

tertainsomi  feelings  of  hostility  towards  it.  (2.)  Nor 
would  the  old  Church  admit  the  claims  of  the  new 
one  to  he  received  to  coimiiunioii  and  fellowship,  if 
inch  claims  were  made.  So  that  the  fact  of  oon- 
interoommunion — and  perhaps  of  hostility — would  be 

sufficient  indication  that  there  was  do  identity  or 
affiliation  between  them. 

One  may  en-  m  bis  apprehension  of  some  points  of 

J  l  dor.  ni.  ll. 


52  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

the  Primitive  Faith.  Education  may  have  accustomed 
him  to  some  modifications  of  the  Primitive  rites  and 
customs.  But  these  things,  so  long  as  they  do  not 
lead  him  to  seek,  by  a  conscious  intention,  to  engraft 
them  upon  the  Primitive  Faith  and  customs ;  or  so  to 
narrow  down  the  Christian  Platform,  and  restrain  the 
liberty  of  conscience  allowed  to  Christians  by  the  Law 
of  Liberty  in  Christ  Jesus,  as  that  its  members  are  not 
allowed  to  hold  the  Faith  in  its  purity — do  not  neces- 
sarily constitute  the  church  so  established,  an  entirely 
distinct  one.  It  may  teach  and  practise  error — but  it 
does  so  unintentionally.  It  was  not  founded  for  the 
purpose  of  binding  over  its  members  to  the  errors  which 
it  inculcates.  The  door  is  not  closed  against  the  light. 
It  has  interposed  no  obstacles  to  the  return  to  the  truth, 
in  its  purity  and  simplicity,  but  everywhere  professes 
the  design  so  to  teach  that  truth  to  its  members. 

The  design  of  the  heresiarch — that  is,  the  person 
who  founds  a  new  sect  or  church — is,  to  found  one 
that  shall  embody  and  represent  his  own  peculiar 
views.  These  views  are  of  course  diverse  from  those 
entertained  by  the  Church  or  churches  already  ex- 
isting— else  there  could  be  no  desire  to  establish  a  new 
one.  Now  we  have  seen,  under  the  Principle  last 
specified,  that  this  desire  or  design  can  not  be  indulged 
in  a  community  where  the  Church  already  exists.  The 
operation  of  the  Principle  now  under  discussion,  is  to 
prevent  this  design  or  desire  from  taking  effect  in  any 
other  community.  The  result  would  be  no  less  a  new 
and  distinct  church  in  the  one  case  than  in  the  other. 
The  founder  lays  a  new  foundation  in  the  doctrines 
and  usages  which  he  advocates,  and  his  followers  are 


II]  MODE    OF    HISTORIC    IDENTIFCATION.  53 

built  upon  that  foundation,  with  himself,  perhaps,  for 
1  the  Chief  Corner-stone.'  And  his  church,  instead  of 
being  an  extension  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  is  most 
evidently  another  and  a  new  one. 

We  have  now  considered  the  three  Principles  of 
Church  extension,  which  encompass  the  whole  subject. 
I  do  not  profess  to  have  enumerated  all  the  principles 
involved — I  have  selected  only  those  which  are  the 
most  general  in  their  character — the  most  obviously 
true,  and  the  most  easily  applied  to  the  facts  of  his- 
tory. With  these  principles,  we  can  follow  the  Church 
from  its  establishment  at  Jerusalem,  in  the  days  of  the 
Apostles,  to  its  extension  and  final  triumph  in  all  the 
remotest  corners  of  the  earth.  Be  it  Episcopal  or 
Presbyterian,  Baptist  or  Papal — be  its  form  and  its 
doctrines  what  they  may- — the  same  Principles  of  Ex- 
tension will  enable  us  to  follow  it  in  its  growth,  and 
identify  its  existence.  We  need  not  even  know  what 
are  its  doctrines  or  its  forms — these  may  all  be  left  as 
;i  matter  for  subsequent  investigation.  But  the  Church 
Itself,  in  any  place,  and  for  any  country,  or  any  age, 
We  can  find  and  identify — postponing  all  secondary 
and  subordinate  questions  until  we  are  able  to  contem- 
plate them  from  a  more  advantageous  position,  and 
Settle  them  more  satisfactorily. 

$   10.    The    application    of    the    foregoing  Another 

1  ii-  11  11  mode   of  ur- 

prmoiples  would  in  all  cases  lead  to  the  cor-    rlYingatUie 

red  result.   Bui  it  would  require  an  extensive  Hi""',,M,u- 
investigation  of  Church  history — and   it    is 

wible  that   in  many  cases  there  are  no  documents 
eztanl  from  which  the  precise  Btate  of  the  tacts  can  be 

ertained. 


54  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

"We  may  then  direct  our  attention  to  two  other 
tests  which  can  be  applied  with  a  less  minute  research 
into  history,  and  yet  lead  to  the  same  result. 

1.  The  first  is  indicated  by  the  answer  given  to 
the  inquiry — Does  the  society  in  question  claim  to  be 
apart  of  the  Church  that  has  always  existed  from  the 
Apostles*  days,  and  to  be  now  in  communion  with  it, 
or  any  part  of  it  ? 

Most  sects  frankly  acknowledge  the  fact  and  the 
occasion  of  their  origin  as  distinct  and  visible  societies, 
and  make  no  claim  to  be  any  part  of  the  Church  that 
was  in  existence  before  them.  Thus  the  Methodists 
claim  to  have  been  founded  as  a  church  by  John 
Wesley.  They  do  not  claim  to  be  a  part  of  the  Church 
of  England — from  which  their  founders  seceded,  nor 
do  they  claim  now  to  be  in  communion  with  it.  Of 
course,  therefore,  they  are  not  to  be  considered  as  a 
legitimate  branch  and  part  of  the  English  Church. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  the  United  States,  does  claim  to  have  been  founded 
by  the  English  Church,  as  a  true  and  legitimate  branch 
of  itself.  She  claims  to  be,  and  in  point  of  fact  now 
is,  in  full  and  reciprocal  communion  with  the  mother 
Church. 

2.  This,  then,  leads  us  to  the  second  part  of  our 
test.  Does  that  which  is  claimed  to  be  the  parent 
Church  acknowledge  the  one  in  question  to  have  been 
duly  founded  as  a  branch  of  herself  ? 

We  have  seen  in  the  case  of  the  Methodists,  that 
they  do  not  claim  to  be  a  regular  branch  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church,  or  in  full  and  reciprocal  communion  with 
it.     So  it  is  true,  likewise,  that  the  English    Church 


II]  MODE    OF   HISTORIC    IDENTIFICATION.  55 

does   not   acknowledge    any   such   relationship,    and 
would  not,  if  it  were  claimed. 

But  in  regard  to  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church, 
the  relationship  claimed  by  it  is  fully  acknowledged. 
Members  go  from  one  Church  to  the  other  by  letters  of 
transference — the  clergy  of  each  Church  are  mutually 
and  reciprocally  acknowledged  by  the  other,  and  re- 
ceived to  a  full  participation  in  the  ministry. 

So,  with  regard  to  the  Church  of  England  itself. 
Go  back  to  a  period  anterior  to  the  divisions  of  the 
East  and  the  West,  and  we  find  it  claiming  to  be  a 
true  and  legitimate  branch  of  the  Catholic  Church  of 
Christ,  and  it  was  so  acknowledged  to  be.  After  the 
division,  it  of  course  adhered  to  the  Romish  Bishop  and 
party  until  the  Reformation  caused  a  further  division 
in  the  Church,  and  then  the  English  Church  adhered 
to  the  Reformation. 

That  it  is,  therefore,  a  branch  of  the  original  Vine, 
may  be  safely  inferred  from  the  application  of  these  two 
tests;  and  the  only  question  in  regard  to  it  is,  whether 
it  became  apostate  by  the  Reformation  or  not.  Up  to 
that  time  it  was  fully  acknowledged  to  be  a  branch  of 
the  Church  of  Christ,  by  that  Church  itself. 

And,  in  fact,  the  two  tests  which  I  have  last  laid 
down,  are  the  ones  in  most  common  use.  You  meet 
1  iii.ii)  111  the  streets,  and  <'»*k  what  church  he  belongs 
to — you  are  seeking  for  tin;  first  test  named.  What 
ohurofa  <l<>cs  he,  claim  to  be  a  member  of?  Suppose  he 
answers  tin-  Methodist.  If  wo  have.  110  special  object 
t"<»r  inquiring  further, and  have  qo  reason  todoubl  his 
word,  we  real  upon  his  assertion  ami  inquire  no  further. 
Dm  if  we  donbl  Ins  word,  or  have  need  to  be  very  cer- 


56  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

tain,  we  go  to  the  Methodist  church  of  which  he  claims 
to  be  a  member,  and  ascertain  if  they  acknowledge 
him  as  such.  If  so,  it  settles  the  question  in  our 
mind,  as  fully  as  though  we  had  compared  all  the  facts 
of  his  admission  with  the  established  rules  and  usages 
of  that  church. 

Now,  this  is  what  I  mean  by  the  application  of  our 
tests  to  particular  churches.  We  first  ask  of  any  one, 
was  it  founded  by  an  Apostle  ?  If  answered  in  the 
negative,  we  ask  by  what  Apostolic  Church  it  was 
founded — from  which  branch  of  the  original  Vine  is  it 
an  offshoot ;  and  if  we  find  that  Church  acknowledg- 
ing its  claims,  we  need  not  doubt  that  the  younger 
Church  was  founded  in  conformity  with  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  the  extension  of  the  Church,  any 
more  than  we  should  if  we  had  carefully  examined  into 
the  facts  of  its  early  history.  We  presume  that  the 
Church  knew  the  principles  of  her  own  identity  and 
extension ;  we  know  that  she  knew  the  facts  of  the 
case  under  consideration,  and  we  are  willing  to  abide 
in  her  judgment,  expressed  by  the  acknowledgment  of 
communion.  A  traveller  meets  a  clergyman  and  asks 
him  to  what  denomination  the  parish  to  which  he 
ministers  belongs.  He  says  the  Presbyterian,  (Old 
School,)  and  on  inquiry  it  is  found  that  he  and  his  par- 
ish are  acknowledged  regularly  to  belong  to  the  Pres- 
oytery  within  whose  geographical  limits  it  is  situated. 
The  traveller  never  doubts  after  this  that  the  minister 
and  his  people  are  a  true  and  legitimate  branch  of  the 
Presbyterian  church. 

So,  if  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  claims  to  be 
a  branch  of  the  English    Church,  and   the   English 


IL]  MODE    OF    HISTORIC    IDENTIFICATION.  57 

Church  claims  to  be  a  branch  of  the  Apostolic  Church, 
and  to  have  been  founded  by  the  Apostles,  and  those 
claims  were  admitted  by  the  rest  of  the  Church  from 
t  he  first,  then  we  could  not.  doubt  that  all  that  was 
essential  to  their  integration  with  the  Church  founded 
by  the  Apostles,  has  been  duly  observed  in  regard  to 
their  origin  as  separate  branches  of  it. 

t  11.  The  Church  is  an  outward  and  visi-  Jn\eec^. 
ble  institution.  By  the  word  we  sometimes  fied  only  by 
mean,  the  people  who  constitute  the  Church. c 
At  other  times  it  is  used  to  indicate  those  rites  and 
elements  of  organization  by  which  the  members  are 
associated  and  united  in  a  body  or  church ;  but,  in 
either  view,  it  is  a  visible  and  tangible  object. 

There  are  those,  however,  who  think  that  wherever 
the  Gospel  is  preached,  and  the  Faith  received,  there 
we  are  to  acknowledge  the  existence  of  the  Church. 

But  evidently  the  Church  and  the  Faith  are  not 
the  same  thing.  •  The  Faith,  as  a  system  of  truth, 
may  be  intellectually  received,  and  dogmatically 
taught,  when  the  rites  and  sacraments  which  were 
designed  to  unite  those  who  receive  it  and  constitute 
them  a  church,  are  not  used.  The  Church  is  not  a 
mere  mull  it  ode  of  believers.  In  order  to  be  a  church, 
they  mast  have  l>een  baptized  and  live  in  some  sort, 
of  fellowship,  join  in  a  worship,  and  be  bound  together 
\  \  some  common  tie. 

I  have  showD  in  the  first   chapter,  thai   those  ele- 

ments  of  organization)  which  constitute  the  believers 

ohuroh  «»r  sooiet)    b)  themselves,  have  ;<    value  of 

their  own.     I  have  by  do  means  exhausted  that  branch 

of  the  subject,    Nor  oan  I  L,ro  into  it  fully  here  without 


58  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

going  further  into  points  that  are  purely  theological  in 
the  stricter  sense  of  the  word,  than  I  design  to  do. 

If  by  the  Faith,  we  mean  simply  the  articles  of 
truth  that  are  to  be  belieyed,  then  manifestly  the  faith 
is  not  all  of  Christianity  that  is  generally  necessary  to 
our  salvation. 

"Without  repeating  what  has  already  been  said 
bearing  directly  on  the  importance  of  the  Church  ;  and 
without  pausing  to  consid-er  what  the  Scriptures  say 
of  certain  rites,  as  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper, 
which  are  parts  of  the  Church  ;  we  will  look,  at  present, 
only  at  its  moral  design.  That  design  is  the  promo- 
tion of  Obedience. 

All  the  antecedent  history  of  Grod's  dealings  with 
man  point  to  this  fact.  All  His  Institutions  and  com- 
mands were  to  test,  to  secure  and  to  promote, 
obedience.  Moses  declares  that  Grod  led  the  Israelites 
through  the  wilderness  forty  years,  that  "  He  might 
prove  them  and  know  what  was  in  their  heart,  whether 
they  would  keep  His  commandments  or  no."  '  The 
prosperity  and  the  adversity  of  the  Jews  depended 
upon  their  obedience  or  disobedience.  And  when  Saul 
had  broken  the  law  of  God  and  saved  a  portion  of  the 
spoil  of  the  Amalekites,  only  that  he  might  offer  it  to 
Grod,  Samuel  thus  reproves  him :  "  Hath  the  Lord  as 
great  delight  in  burnt  offerings  and  sacrifices  as  in 
obeying  the  voice  of  the  Lord  ?  Behold,  to  obey,  is 
better  than  sacrifice,  and  to  hearken,  than  the  fat  of 
rams."  "2 

So  in  the  Christian  Dispensation.     The  primary 

1  Deut,  viii.  2.  2  1  Sam.  xv.  22. 


II.]  MODE    OF   HISTORIC   IDENTIFICATION.  59 

duty  of  the  Apostolic  commission  was  to  preach  the 
Gospel.1  Yet,  as  St.  Paul  says,  the  preaching  of  the 
Gospel  itself  was  only  a  means  to  a  further  end,  namely 
"  for  the  obedience  of  the  Faith." 2  And  he  assures  us 
that  he  was- called  to  the  Apostleship  "  for  obedience  to 
the  faith  among  all  nations."3  St.  Peter  writes  to 
those  who  were  "Elect  according  to  the  foreknow- 
ledge of  God,  the  Father,  through  sanctification  of 
the  Spirit,  unto  obedience  and  the  sprinkling  of  the 
blood  of  Jesus  Christ." 4  Our  Blessed  Lord  became 
the  Author  of  salvation  only  to  those  that  obey  Him.6 
St.  Peter  asks."  What  shall  the  end  be  of  them  that 
obey  not  the  Gospel  ?  " 6  And  finally,  St.  Paul  speaks 
of  our  Lord's  taking  vengeance  at  His  second  coming, 
on  them  "  that  obey  not  the  Gospel." 1 

Now,  in  all  these  passages  and  in  many  more  like 
them,  the  importance  is  attached,  not  to  hearing  or 
believing  the  Gospel  merely,  but  to  obeying  it. 

The  faith,  therefore,  is  not  the  only  thing  that  is 
essential,  either  for  the  identity  of  the  Church  or  for 
the  salvation  of  its  members.  Obedience  to  the  posi- 
tive institutions  and  commands  of  the  Gospel  is  essen- 
tial also:  and  the  Faith  itself  is  promulgated  for  the 
promotion  of  this  obedience. 

The  iirst  act  of  sin  committed  on  the  face  of  the 

rth,    was  (so  tar   as  we  can  see,  or  are  informed) 

simply  an  act  of  disobedience  to  a  positive  command 

or  institution      In  the  :i«'t    itself,  aside  from  the    e.-m- 

mandmenl  of  Grod   respecting  it,  there  was  nothing 

that  1^  repugnant  to  human  nature.     Nor  could   any 

1  Ifaifti  wi.  15.      •'  Horn,  wi.  .  »  Rom.  i.  6.       4  1  ivm  1.  -i. 

5  li.i).  v.  « 1  Peter  it.  17.      ■  -i  Then  i  8. 


60  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  Chap. 

evil  consequences  be  foreseen  to  flow  from  it  except 
those  that  depended  upon  the  divine  threatening.  It 
was,  therefore,  purely  a  test  of  obedience.  And  all  the 
dealings  of  Grod  with  man  since  that  time  serve  to  en- 
force this  precept  of  Holy  Scripture  already  quoted, 
"  Behold,  to  obey,  is  better  than  Sacrifice,  and  to 
hearken,  than  the  fat  of  rams." 

Hence  all  the  orders  and  subordinations  of  men. 
Children  are  commanded  to  obey  their  parents1.  Ser- 
vants are  commanded  to  obey  their  masters3.  Wives, 
their  husbands3 — citizens,  their  rulers,4  and  Christians, 
their  pastors.5  Nor  are  the  recognized  limits  of  the  ob- 
ligations to  obedience  always  coincident  with  the  jus- 
tice and  right  of  the  thing  commanded.  Children  and 
servants  are  commanded  to  obey  "in  all  things."6  St. 
Peter  says,  "  Servants  be  subject  to  your  masters, 
with  all  fear  :  not  only  to  the  good  and  gentle,  but  also 
to  the  fro  ward ;  for  this  is  thankworthy,  if  a  man 
for  conscience  toward  God  endure  grief  and  suffering 
wrongfully.  For  what  glory  is  it  if  when  ye  be  buf- 
feted for  your  faults,  ye  shall  take  it  patiently  ?  but  if 
when  ye  do  well  and  suffer  for  it  ye  take  it  patiently, 
this  is  acceptable  to  Grod."7  So  too,  in  religions  mat- 
ters, notwithstanding  all  the  corruptions  and  hypoc- 
risy of  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  our  Lord  commanded 
"  the  multitude,"  "  AH,  therefore,  whatsoever  they  bid 
you  observe,  that  observe  and  do,  but  do  ye  not  after 
their  works,  for  they  say  and  do  not."8     And  the  reason 

1  Eph.  vi  2.     Col.  iii.  20.  a  Col.  iii.  22. 

3  Eph.  v.  22.  Col.  iii.  18.  1  Peter  iii,  1.        4  Rom.  xiii.  1-5.  Tit.  iii.  1. 

5Heb.  xiii.  7,  17.  6  Col.  iii.  20,  22. 

i  1  Pet.  ii.  18,  19,  20.  8  Matt,  xxiii.  3. 


II.]  MODE   OF   HISTORIC    IDENTIFICATION.  61 

given  for  this  commandment  is,  that  "  the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees  sat  in  Moses'  seat,"  that  is,  in  the  place  of 
office  and  authority  over  them. 

Now,  most  manifestly  the  spirit  of  obedience  is  one 
of  the  most  essential  things  in  Christianity — so  essen- 
tial, (as  is  evident  from  what  has  been  quoted,)  as  to 
be  a  justification,  on  the  part  of  those  who  obey,  for 
many  things,  which  otherwise  are  not  as  they  ought 
to  be.  Jeremy  Taylor  remarks,  "  neither  can  I  be 
confident  that  I  am  wise  in  any  thing,  except  when  I 
obey  ;  for  then  I  have  the  wisdom  of  Him  whom  God 
has  placed  over  me  for  my  warrant  if  I  am  right,  or 
my  excuse  if  I  am  wrong." 

Now  the  Church  is  most  intimately  connected  with 
Obedience.  The  Church  implies  positive  institutions — ■ 
an  outward  visible  existence.  It  implies  not  merely 
the  preaching  and  hearing  the  Gospel,  but  the  keep- 
\i\'j  the  commandments  of  God — the  public  profession 
before  1 1 1«- n — the  denying  one's  self  and  taking  up  his 
cross,  that  he  may  walk  in  the  way  of  the  Lord's  ap- 
point inLr.  ami  not  in  the  way  of  his  own  choosing.  It 
implies  meekness,  humility,  submission,  and  obedience. 
It  implies  the  exercise  of  those,  virtues  on  which  depend 
the  harmony,  the  peace,  and  the  happiness  of  Heaven. 
And  each  positive  institution  that  enters  as  a  coin  p<>ii.  nt 
put  of  the  Church's  constitution  on  earth,  is  designed 
t<»  tram  n>  t<>  take  our  place  with  tie-  Cherubim  and 
Seraphim  among  tin-  orders  and  subordinations  of  the 
Church  in  Heaven.  Mis  Bible  alone — whether  read 
in  the  privacy  of  his  own  olosel  or  preached  to  him  by 
the  chance  visitations  of  someone  gifted  with  utter- 
ance   in  divine    things,  is  not  all   that    man  needs — is 


62  'THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

not  all  that  his  Saviour  has  provided  for  him.  He 
needs  a  home — a  communion  of  saints — a  fellowship 
of  kindred  minds — a  co-operation  of  sympathising 
hearts.  There  is  a  trial  of  his  humility,  his  submission, 
and  of  his  self-denial,  which  His  Lord  calls  him  to 
make — a  testing  of  his  fitness  for  Heaven,  as  well  as 
a  school  to  train  him  in  that  fitness.  Man  needs  not 
only  to  be  forgiven,  but  to  be  brought  back  to  the 
state  of  obedience  from  which  he  has  rebelled.  Obedi- 
ence can  be  tested  only  by  outward  institutions  and 
commands,  to  which  the  conscience  shall  bend  and 
habituate  the  will  and  the  affections.  It  cannot  be 
tested  by  mere  subjective  emotions  or  internal  desires. 

That  the  Church  has  an  importance,  therefore,  in- 
dependent of  the  importance  of  the  Faith,  is  undenia- 
ble. The  Church  is  Christianity  located  and  put  in 
practice.  It  is  a  body  of  men  believing  the  Doctrines, 
and  observing  the  Rites  and  Duties  of  Christianity.  It 
is  the  fellowship  of  the  Disciples — the  test  of  our  faith, 
and  of  our  obedience  to  (rod. 

Let  it  then  be  distinctly  kept  in  mind,  that  we  are 
seeking  to  identify  the  Church,  and  not  the  Faith.  We 
should  identify  the  Faith  by  first  seeking  out  the  earliest 
Creed,  and  then  follow  that  creed  in  its  adoption  or 
rejection  through  the  lapse  of  ages,  carefully  noting 
every  variation  in  its  language,  and  in  the  sense  in 
which  it  was  understood  and  believed.  But  in  identi- 
fying the  Church,  we  start  with  the  idea  that  the 
Church  is  a  visible  society  of  men  and  women,  capable 
of  a  visible  historic  existence  through  successive  gen- 
erations, as  they  pass  over  the  stage  of  human  action. 

And  when  we  have  thus  outwardly  and  historically 


IL]  MODE   OF  HISTORIC   IDENTIFICATION.  63 

identified  the  Church,  we  may  entertain  a  presumption 
almost  as  strong  as  certainty  itself,  that  we  shall  find 
in  its  teaching  "  the  Faith  once  delivered  unto  the 
Saints."  At  all  events  we  have  found  the  casket  in 
which  the  jewel  was  placed — the  keeper  and  witness 
to  whom  the  Truth  was  entrusted,  and  whose  testimony 
we  are  bound  to  take  into  consideration  in  all  our  in- 
quiries after  the  Truth  itself. 


CHAPTER  .III. 


THE      CHURCH      BEFORE      THE      REFORMATION      AND      ITS 
CONDITION     AT     THAT     TIME. 

The  full  execution  of  my  plan  would  require  me  to 
go  over  the  whole  history  of  the  planting  and  extension 
of  the  Church  from  the  day  of  Pentecost  up  to  the 
present  time,  and  show  the  application  of  the  princi- 
ples laid  down  in  a  previous  chapter  throughout.  But 
this,  as  will  be  seen  at  once,  would  require  a  great 
deal  of  dry  detail  which  would  have  no  immediate 
bearing  upon  the  immediate  practical  result  to  which 
I  design  to  bring  my  present  undertaking.  It  will  be 
borne  in  mind,  that  while  I  have  laid  down  the  princi- 
ples by  which  to  identify  the  Church  in  general,  I  am 
aiming  to  give  to  the  present  discussion  of  the  subject 
such  a  shape  as  to  enable  one  with  certainty  to  identify 
the  Church  here  in  these  United  States,  from  amidst 
so  many  claiming  sects.  I  shall  select  my  portions  of 
the  history  of  the  Church  for  the  application  of  my 
principles  with  this  view ;  leaving  out  all  others  as 
having  no  immediate  connection  with  the  object  more 
immediately  before  us. 

The  Apostles,  in  executing  their  mission  of  preach- 
ing the  Grospel,  first  settled  in  the  principal  'owns  and 
cities,  establishing  a  Church  in  each,  which  was  left  to 


Chap.  Ill]  CHURCH   BEFORE   THE   REFORMATION.  65 

grow  until  it  should  extend  the  dominion  of  Christ's 
Earthly  Kingdom  over  the  surrounding  country,  and 
meet  the  efforts  of  the  Church  planted  in  the  next  city 
spreading  the  Gospel  in  like  manner  over  its  surround- 
ing territory.  These  Churches  were  at  first  independent 
of  oneanother.  And  if  we  would  follow  out  the  history 
of  their  planting,  we  should  find  the  three  Principles 
already  laid  down  fully  and  exactly  followed. 

$  1.  But  instead  of  following  the   long         General 
detail  of  the  history  of  their  planting,  it  may  g^'j^JS 
be  both  more  satisfactory  and  more  interest-  down  above, 
ing  to  quote  a  few  passages  from  the  early  ^^"j 
Christian  writers  to  show  that  the  principles  to. 
to  which  I  have  called  attention,  were  then 
substantially  regarded   in  the  same  light  as  I  have 
aimed  to  place  them.     Of  course,  it  will  not  be  ex- 
pected that  they  were  then  stated   in  the  way  that  I 
have  stated  them ;  for  there  was  then  no  occasion  for 
such  a  statement.     The  principles  were  not  disputed 
nor  denied,  and  needed  not  to  be  stated  in  either  an 
argumentative  or  didactic  way.     All  that  we  can  ex- 
pect therefore,  is  to  find  them  recognised  or  assumed 
as  unquestionably  true.     The  evidence  of  the  regard 
for  these   principles  would  be,  perhaps  most  clearly 
manifested  in  such  a  work  as  Euskbius's  Ecclesiastical 
History,  where  he  gives  an  account  of  the  spread  and 
perpetuation  of  the  Church  down  to  his  own  time,  that 
is,  through  the  first  two  centuries.      In  each  case,  we 
find  the  historian carefully  specifying  the  facts  which 
show  the  conformity  to  these  principles:   and  yet   not 
in  a  way  to  imply  that  there  was  any  dispute,  or  doubt 
about  them.     But  rather   in  such  a  way  as  to  imply 


66  THE   CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

that  these  were  the  essential  facts,  which  it  was  well 
and  important  to  put  distinctly  on  record. 

§  2.  The  first  passage  that  I  will  quote  is  Quotations 
from    Tertullian,    who   was   converted   to fromTERTUL 

'  LIAN. 

Christianity  towards  the  close  of  the  second 
century.     In  writing  against  Heretics,  or,  perhaps  I 
had  better  say — concerning  the  rule  by  which  we  are 
to  decide  who  are  Heretics,  he  says  : 

"  Immediately,  therefore,  the  Apostles  (whom  this 
title  intendeth  to  denote  as  '  sent ')  having  chosen  by 
lot  a  twelfth,  Matthias,  into  the  room  of  Judas,  on  the 
authority  of  a  prophecy  which  is  in  a  Psalm  of  David, 
having  obtained  the  promised  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
for  the  working  of  miracles  and  for  utterance,  first 
having  throughout  Judea  borne  witness  to  the  faith  in 
Jesus  Christ  and  established  Churches,  next  went 
forth  into  the  world  and  preached  the  same  doctrine 
of  the  same  Faith  to  the  nations,  and  forthwith  founded 
Churches  in  every  city  from  whence  the  other  Churches 
thenceforward  borrowed  the  tradition  of  the  Faith  [re- 
ceived the  Faith]  and  the  seeds  of  doctrine,  and  are 
daily  borrowing  them,  that  they  may  become  churches. 
And  for  this  cause  they  are  themselves  also  accounted 
Apostolical,  as  being  the  offspring  of  Apostolical 
Churches.  The  whole  kind  must  needs  be  classed 
under  the  original.  Wherefore  these  Churches,  so 
many  and  so  great,  are  but  that  one  primitive  Church 
from  the  Apostles,  whence  they  all  spring.  Thus  all 
are  the  primitive,  and  all  are  Apostolical,  while  all  are 


one."  ' 


Dodgson's  Tertullian.    De.  Praescrip  Her.  §  xx. 


IIL]  CHURCH  BEFORE  THE   REFORMATION.  67 

And  then  in  reference  to  others,  he  says  : — 
"  If  there  be  any  heresies  [sects]  which  venture  to 
plant  themselves  in  the  midst  of  the  age  of  the  Apos- 
tles, that  they  may  therefore  be  thought  to  have  been 
handed  down  from  the  Apostles,  because  they  existed 
under  the  Apostles,  we  may  say,  let  them  then  make 
known  the  originals  of  their  churches :  let  them  unfold 
the  roll  of  their  bishops  so  coming  down  in  succession 
from  the  beginning  that  their  first  bishop  had  for  his 
ordainer  and  predecessor  some  one  of  the  Apostles,  or 
of  the  Apostolic  men,  that  continued  steadfast  with  the 
Apostles.  For  in  this  manner  do  the  Apostolic  Churches 
reckon  their  origin  :  as  the  Church  of  Smyrna  recount- 
ed that  Polycarp  was  placed  there  by  John  ;  as  that  of 
Rome  doth,  that  Clement  was  in  like  manner  ordained 
by  Peter.  Just  so  can  the  rest  also  show  those, 
whom  being  appointed  by  the  Apostles  to  the  Episco- 
pate, they  have  as  transmitters  of  the  Apostolic  seed. 
Let  the  heretics  invent  something  of  the  same  sort.  But 
even  though  they  invent  it,  they  will  advance  never  a 
step  :  for  their  Doctrine,  when  compared  with  that  of 
the  Apostles,  will  of  itself  declare,  by  the  difference 
and  contrariety  between  them,  that  it  had  neither  any 
Apostle  for  its  author  nor  any  Apostolic  men  :  because, 
as  the  Apostles  would  not  have  taught  things  differing 
from  each  other,  so  neither  would  Apostolic  men  have 
set  forth  things  contrary  to  the  Apostles.  *  *  # 
To  this  test,  then,  they  will  be  challenged  by  those 
Churches,  which,  although  they  oan  bring  forward  as 
their  founder  no  one  of  the  Apostles  or  of  Apostolic 
men,  (as  being  of  much  later  date,  and  indeed  being 
founded  daily,)  nevertheless  since  they  agree  in  the 


68  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

same  Faith,  are,  by  reason  of  their  consanguinity  in 
doctrine,  counted  not  the  less  Apostolical.  So  let  all 
heresies  when  challenged  by  our  Churches  to  both 
these  tests,  [to  wit,  their  origin  and  their  faith]  prove 
themselves  Apostolical  in  whatever  way  they  may 
think  themselves  so  to  be.  But  in  truth  they  neither 
are  so,  nor  can  they  prove  themselves  to  be  what  they 
are  not,  nor  are  they  received  into  union  and  commu- 
nion by  Churches,  in  any  way  Apostolical,  to  wit,  be- 
cause they  are  in  no  way  Apostolical,  by  reason  of  the 
sacred  mystery  which  they  teach/' 1 

The  "mystery"2  here  referred  to  is  the  Creed, 
which  in  other  places  the  same  author  calls  The  Rule 
of  Faith.     On  this  point  he  says  : — 

"An  adulteration  by  the  sense  imposed  [on  the 
Scriptures]  is  as  much  opposed  to  the  truth  as  a  cor- 
ruption by  the  pen."  "  To  the  Scriptures,  therefore, 
we  must  not  appeal :  nor  must  we  try  the  issue  on 
points  on  which  the  victory  is  either  none,  or  doubtful 
— or  too  little  doubtful,  [since  the  very  doubt  is  their 
victory.]  For  though  the  debate  on  the  Scriptures 
should  not  so  turn  out,  as  to  place  each  party  on  an 
equal  footing,  the  order  of  things  would  require  that 
this  question  which  is  now  the  only  one  to  be  discussed, 
should  first  be  proposed,  namely :  '  To  whom  belongeth 
the  very  Faith  ;  whose  are  the  Scriptures  ;  by  whom, 
through  whom,  and  where,  and  to  whom  was  that  Rule 
whereby  men  become  Christians  [  The  Apostles'*  Creed] 
delivered?''    For  wherever  both  the  true    Christian 

1  Tertullian  as  above,  §  xxxii. 

2  Mustermm.   1v/ui$o\ov,  or  Creed.    Such  were  the  names  by  which 
the  Apostles'  Creed  is  very  generally  denoted  in  the  ancient  writers. 


III.]  CHURCH  BEFORE  THE   REFORMATION.  69 

Rule  and  Faith  shall  be  shown  to  be,  there  will  the 
true  Scriptures  be,  and  the  true  expositions  and  all  the 
true  Christian  traditions."1  And  again,  "  If  these  things 
be  so,  so  that  the  Truth  be  adjudged  to  belong  to  us, 
as  many  as  walk  according  to  this  Rule,  [the  Apostles' 
Creed,]  which  the  Churches  have  handed  down  from 
the  Apostles,  the  Apostles  from  Christ,  Christ  from 
Grod,  the  reasonableness  of  our  proposition  is  mani- 
fest, which  determineth,  that  heretics  are  not  to  be 
allowed  to  enter  upon  an  appeal  to  the  Scriptures  whom 
we  prove  without  the  Scriptures  to  have  no  concern 
with  the  Scriptures.2 

The  reader  will  please  bear  in  mind  that  I  am  not 
quoting  Tertullian  for  the  sake  of  expressing  my  own 
ideas  in  another  man's  language,  nor  for  the  sake  of 
approving  all  that  he  says.  My  object  is  to  show  that 
the  Principles  of  Church  extension  which  I  have  laid 
down,  were  constantly  kept  in  view  and  regarded  as 
snored  by  the  Church  generally  before  the  Reformation. 
For  this  purpose  I  continue  my  quotations  a  little 
farther. 

$  3.  The  next  author  that  I  shall  quote  is     Cyprian 

x  quoted. 

Cyprian,  who  had  also  been  a  heathen  of  emi- 
nence before  he  was  converted.      He  died  a  Martyr,  a. 
d.258,  Sept.  14. 

"  The  Church  is  likewise  one,  though  she  be  spread 
abroad,  and   multiplies  with  the  increase  of  her  pro- 

•w  :  even  as  the  sun  lias  rays  many,  yet  one.  Light  ; 
and  the  tree  boughs  many,  ye1  its  strength  is  one 
seated  in  the  deep-lodged    root;   and   as   where   many 

1  Ti  uiuu.iAN  ;i-  above,  §  xix.  a  §  xxxviL 


70  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

streams  flow  down  from  one  source,  though  a  multi- 
plicity of  waters  seem  to  be  diffused  from  the  bounti- 
fulness  of  the  overflowing  abundance,  unity  is  preserved 
in  the  source  itself.  Part  a  ray  of  sun  from  its  orb, 
and  its  unity  forbids  the  division  of  light ;  break  a 
branch  from  the  tree,  once  broken  it  can  bud  no  more ; 
cut  the  stream  from  its  fountain,  the  remnant  will  be 
dried  up.  Thus  the  Church  flooded  with  the  light  of 
the  Lord,  puts  forth  her  rays  through  the  whole  world, 
with  yet  one  light,  which  is  spread  upon  all  places, 
while  its  unity  of  body  is  not  infringed.  She  stretches 
forth  her  branches  over  the  universal  earth,  in  the 
riches  of  plenty,  and  pours  abroad  her  beautiful  and 
onward  streams,  yet  is  there  one  head,  one  source,  one 
Mother  abundant  in  the  results  of  her  fruitfulness."1 

Again,  the  same  author  speaking  of  Novation,  who 
had  tried  to  get  up  a  new  church,  says  : 

"  He  attempts  to  make  a  human  church,  and  sends 
his  new  apostles  through  very  many  cities  that  he 
may  establish  certain  recent  foundations  of  his  own 
institution."  "  And  does  any  think  that  there  can  be, 
in  one  place,  either  many  shepherds  or  many  flocks  ? 
The  Apostle  Paul,  likewise  intimating  the  same  unity, 
solemnly  exhorts  I  beseech  you  brethren,  by  the  name 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  ye  all  speak  the  same 
thing,  and  that  there  be  no  schisms  among  you ;  bat 
that  ye  be  joined  together  in  the  same  mind  and  in  the 
same  judgment.  And  again  he  says,  '  forbearing  one 
another  in  love,  endeavoring  to  keep  the  unity  of  the 
spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace.'     Think  you  that  any  can 

1  Cyprian  Be  Unitate,  Oxford  Trans.  §  4. 


Ill]  CHURCH    BEFORE   THE   REFORMATION.  71 

stand  and  live  who  withdraws  from  the  Church  and 
forms  himself  a  new  home  and  a  different  dwelling  ?"* 

$  4.  St.  Chrysostom,  a.  d.  395,  in  writing  chrysos- 
his  Homilies  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  T0M  quotetL 
on  the  expression  "  churches  of  G  alalia"  thinks  that 
St.  Paul  was  referring  to  the  sects  that  had  been  foun- 
ded by  the  preachers  of  another  Gospel.  He  notices 
that  the  Apostle  does  not  call  them  "the  beloved"  or 
"the  saints"  nor  even  "the  churches  of  God"  but 
simply  "  churches  of  Galatia."  "  Here  at  the  outset, 
as  well  as  elsewhere,  he  attacks  their  irregularities  and 
therefore  gives  them  the  name  of  *  churches '  in  order 
to  impress  them  and  to  reduce  them  to  unity.  For 
persons  split  into  many  parties  cannot  properly  claim 
the  appellation  '  church  f  for  the  name  is  one  of  har- 
mony and  concord."2 

This  exposition,  as  will  be  seen  at  once,  is  based 
upon  the  idea,  that  there  could  be  only  one  Church  in 
a  place  that  could  "  properly  claim  the  name."  He 
seems  not  to  have  thought  of  the  possibility  of  there 
lx-ing  more  than  one  in  the  same  community,  and- 
therefore  he  gives  the  explanation  which  we  find 
above. 

Again  he  says  : 

"  For  this  is,  if  anything,  the  subversion  of  the 
Church,  the  being  in  divisions.  This  is  the  Devil's 
weapon,  this  turncth.  all  things  upside-down.  For 
bo  long  as  the  body  is  joined  into  one,  he  has  no 
power  to  gel  an  entrance,  but  it  is  from  division  that 
the  offence  oometh."* 

1  Bpiri  Lt.  g  20  and  D>  UnUate  j?  7. 

2  Oommentarj  on  GtaL  L  2.  I  [om.  xxxii.  on  Etom.  xvi.  17,  18. 


72  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

My  extracts  are  getting  to  be  lengthy.  But  I 
must  beg  the  reader  to  bear  with  me  a  few  moments 
longer.  I  now  quote  from  Cyril,  Bishop  of  Jerusalem, 
a.  d.  350. 

cvRiLof       §  5.  "While  the  Kings  of  particular  na- 
jerusaiem  tiong  have  boun(is  set  to  their  dominion,  the 

quoted. 

Holy  Church  Catholic  alone  extends  her 
illimitable  sovereignty  over  the  whole  world."  "  Now 
it  is  called  catholic  because  it  is  throughout  the  world, 
from  one  end  of  the  earth  to  the  other,  and  because  it 
teaches,  universally  and  completely,  one  and  all  the 
doctrines  which  ought  to  come  to  men's  knowledge, 
concerning  things  both  visible  and  invisible,  heavenly 
and  earthly ;  and  because  it  subjugates  in  order  to 
godliness,  every  class  of  men,  governors  and  governed, 
learned  and  unlearned ;  and  because  it  universally 
treats  and  heals  every  sort  of  sins  which  are  committed 
by  soul  or  body,  and  possesses  in  itself  every  form  of 
virtue  which  is  named  both  in  deeds  and  words  and  in 
every  kind  of  spiritual  gifts.  And  it  is  rightly  named 
<  Church?  because  it  calls  forth  and  assembles  to- 
gether all  men."1 

The  same  author  says  also  : 

"  But  since  the  word  '  Church  '  or  '  Assembly  '  is 
applied  to  different  things  (as  also  it  is  written  of  the 
multitude  in  the  theatre  of  the  Ephesians,  Acts  xix.  41, 
and  since  one  might  properly  say  that  there  is  a  church 
of  the  evil  doers)  the  Faith  [the  rule  of  Faith,  or 
Apostle's  Creed]  has  delivered  to  thee,  by  way  of  secu- 
rity, the  Article,  and  in  One  Holy  Catholic  Church, 

1  Catchet.  Lect.  xviii.  §  27,  23,  24. 


HL]  CHURCH   BEFORE  THE   REFORMATION.  73 

that  thou  mayest  avoid  their  wretched  meetings  and 
ever  abide  with  the  Holy  Church  Catholic  in  which 
thou  wast  born  again.  And  if  ever  thou  art  sojourn- 
ing in  any  city,  inquire  not  simply  where  the  Lord's 
House  is,  (for  the  sects  of  the  profane  also  make  an  at- 
tempt to  call  their  own  dens  t  Houses  of  the  Lord,') 
nor  merely  where  the  Church  is,  but  where  is  the 
Catholic  Church.  For  this  is  the  peculiar  name  of 
this  Holy  Body,  the  Mother  of  us  all,  which  is  the 
Spouse  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Only  Begotten 
Son  of  God."1 

Here  I  close  my  quotations  from  individual  au- 
thors, not,  however,  from  want  of  much  more  like 
this,  (for  I  could  easily  fill  a  volume,)  but  for  want  of 
room,  and  because  I  deem  it  unnecessary  to  proceed 
any  farther. 

§  6.  I  will  next  call  attention  to  another      canons 

quoted  ana 

class  of  testimony,  namely,  the   Canons  of  referred  to. 
the  Church.     We  have  a  series  of  Canons 
that  were  adopted  some  of  them  very  early — and  all 
of  them  received  the  sanction  and  approbation  of  the 
whole  Church.     From  these  only  shall  I  quote.     And 
I  will  begin  with  their  definition  of  Heretics : 

"  And  we  include  under  the  name  of  heretics 
those  who  have  been  formally  cast  off  by  the  Church, 
and  those  who  have  since  been  anathematized  by  us, 
and  in  addition  to  these,  those  also,  who  do  indeed 
pretend  to  confess  the  sound  Faith,  but  have  sepa- 
rated themselves  and  founded  congregations  in  oppo- 
sition to  <>ur  canonical  Bishops."1 


1  I^ct.  xviii.  ^  26.  3  Can.  vi.,  Constant inopla 

4 


74  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

These  Canons  make  provisions  for  persons  going 
from  one  city  or  province  to  another,  and  being  there 
received.  But  they  never  speak  of  going  from  one 
religious  communion  to  another  in  the  same  commun- 
ity in  that  way.  This  shows  first,  that  all  the  Churches 
in  different  places  were  in  one  communion,  and  sec- 
ondly, that  they  recognised  none  as  Churches  of  Christ 
that  were  not  in  the  same  communion  with  them,  and 
finally,  that  there  was  but  one  Church  in  the  same 
city. 

They  abound  in  laws  prohibiting  any  of  the  clergy 
from  separating  from  the  Church  to  form  separate  con- 
gregations, distinctly  repudiating  all  such  from  being 
in  the  communion  of  the  Church. 

They  are  full  of  restrictions  preventing  the  people 
from  praying,  marrying,  or  having  any  religious  asso- 
ciations with  heretics. 

I  had  designed  to  quote  these  Canons  at  length. 
But  that  will  be  unnecessary ;  as  it  is  not  from  isola- 
ted Canons  or  here  and  there  a  pointed  expression,  that 
we  can  best  judge  of  their  bearing  in  this  respect. 
The  whole  tenor  and  frame  work  of  them  is  based  upon 
the  Principles  of  identification  that  I  have  already 
stated.  To  show  this  fully  would  require  far  more 
lengthy  quotations  than  I  have  room  for  in  this  place, 
or  than  the  reader's  patience  would  hold  out  to  ex- 
amine. 

I  have  not  quoted  or  referred  to  these  passages  as 
authority  to  give  weight  to  what  I  have  said,  but  to 
show  that  these  Principles  were  regarded  in  the 
Church  so  as  that  no  society  or  assembly  of  persons 
calling  themselves  Christians,  could  have  been  received 


III.]  CHURCH   BEFORE   THE    REFORMATION.  75 

and  acknowledged  to  be  a  part  of  the  Church  in  viola- 
tion of  them.  They  would  have  been  at  once  put 
down  as  heretics  or  schismatics — a  new  church  on  a 
human  foundation  not  holding  to  the  Head,  and  there- 
fore not  of  the  Body.1 

§.  At  the    time    of  the  introduction  of     The  early 

subdivisions 

Christianity,  the  Roman  empire  included  in  the  church, 
nearly  the  whole  of  the  known  world.  This 
Empire  was  divided,  in  the  first  place,  into  Dioceses, 
which  were  the  largest  divisions.  Each  Diocese  con- 
tained several  Provinces,  and  these  Provinces  were 
again  subdivided  into  Parishes.  Each  city  was  un- 
der the  immediate  government  of  certain  magistrates 
within  its  own  body,  at  the  head  of  which  was  an 
officer  called  Dictator  or  Defensor-civitatis,  and  whose 
power  extended  not  only  over  the  city,  but  over  all  the 
adjacent  territory,  commonly  called  the  ^odc-reix  or 
-ru^otKix  [Parish,]  the  suburbs  or  lesser  towns  belong- 
ing to  its  jurisdiction.  Such  for  the  most  part  were 
the  cities  spoken  of  in  the  New  Testament,  in  which 
we  read  of  Churches  being  established.  Each  such 
city  had  a  separate  government  by  itself,  and  was,  to 
a  very  great  extent,  independent  of  all  others.  This 
constitutes  what  in  modern  ecclesiastical  lansma^e,  is 
called  a  Diocese.  Several  of  these  divisions  of  the 
Empire  conjoined  into  one,  made  the  next  larger  di- 
vision, or  a  Province,  subject  to  the  authority  of  our, 
chief  magistrate,  who  resided  in  the  metropolis,  <>r 

chief  city  of  the  PfOvifU 

The  necessities  of  the  Churches,  to  sa)  not)dng  of 

»  OoLii  19. 


76  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  {Q*ap. 

the  intention  of  their  Founder,  soon  led  to  an  associa- 
tion of  the  several  Dioceses  in  a  Province  for  purposes 
of  mutual  edification  and  helpfulness.  All  the  early 
records  of  the  Church  speak  of  the  Diocesan  Churches 
as  having  one  man  at  their  head,  called  by  a  variety  of 
names,  "Apostle"  "Angel"  "President"  "Papa" 
&c.  &c,  but  more  generally,  and  always  in  the  Can- 
ons or  laws  of  Discipline  "Bishop"  that  is,  "over- 
seer"— to  whom  alone  was  reserved  the  right  of 
ordaining  the  clergy.  The  very  oldest  canon  or 
Church  law,  in  existence,  requires  tjiat  for  the  Ordin- 
ation of  one  of  these  Bishops,  there  should  be  at  the 
least  two  or  three  Bishops  present  and  assisting,  while 
each  Bishop  was  allowed  alone  and  by  himself  to  ordain 
the  other  clergy  of  his  Diocese.  In  the  same  code, 
which,  as  I  have  already  said  is  the  earliest  code  that 
has  come  down  to  us — reaching  back,  as  some  of  its 
Canons  doubtless  do,  to  near  the  time  of  the  death  of 
St.  John  the  Apostle,  it  is  ordained  as  follows : 

"  Let  there  be  a  meeting  of  the  Bishops  [in  a  Prov- 
ince] twice  a  year,  and  let  them  examine  amongst 
themselves  the  decrees  or  canons  concerning  religion, 
and  settle  the  ecclesiastical  controversies  which  may 
have  occurred."1 

The  Bishop  of  the  metropolis  of  the  Province  was 
called  Metropolitan  or  Arch-Bishop. 

Hence  the  Council  of  Antioch,  a.  d.  341,  ordains : 

"It  behoves  the  Bishops  in  every  Province  to  own 
him  who  presides  over  the  Metropolis,  and  who  is  to 
take  care  of  the  whole  Province  ;  because  all  who  have 

1  Apost.  Can.  xxxvii. 


Ill]  CHURCH   BEFORE   THE   REFORMATION.  77 

business  come  together  from  every  side  to  the  Me- 
tropolis. Wherefore,  also,  it  has  been  decreed  that  he 
should  have  precedence  of  rank,  and  that  the  other 
Bishops  should  do  nothing  of  consequence  without 
him,  according  to  the  ancient  Canon,  which  we  have 
received  from  our  "Fathers  :  or  at  any  rate,  only  those 
things  which  belong  to  each  particular  parish  [Diocese 
in  the  modern  sense  of  the  word,]  and  the  districts 
which  are  under  it.  For  each  Bishop  is  to  have 
authority  over  his  own  Parish,  [Diocese,]  and  to  admin- 
ister it  with  that  piety  which  concerns  every  one,  and 
to  make  provision  for  all  the  Districts  which  is  under 
his  City,  to  ordain  Presbyters  and  Deacons,  and  to  de- 
termine everything  with  judgment ;  but  let  him 
attempt  nothing  further  without  the  Bishop  of  the 
Metropolis  ;  and  let  him  not  do  anything  without  the 
consent  of  others."1 

Ere  long,  however,  there  was  occasion  for  a  still 
more  extensive  association,  and  the  Bishops  and 
Churches  of  several  Provinces  began  to  meet  together. 
And  then  the  several  provinces  in  one  of  the  larger 
divisions  of  the  Empire,  called  a  Diocese,  as  they  then 
used  the  term,  were  associated  in  a  sort  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal union,  and  the  Bishop  of  the  chief  city  was  called 
a  "  Patriarch"  or  "  Exarch" 

Of  this  subdivision  of  the  Church  we  find  many 
proofs  in  the  early  Canons.  The  Council  of  Chaledon 
[a.  d.  451,]  decreed  thai 

"If  any  [Bishop]  is  wronged  by  his  Metropolitan, 
be  is  to  be  judged  l>y  the  Exarch  of  the  Diocese,"  or  by 
the  Emperor.9 

1  Can.  fab  *  Can.  ix.  xvil 


78  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  Chat. 

Yet  even  among  these  Patriarchs  there  must  needs 
be  some  order  of  precedence.  The  first  Council  of 
Constantinople,  a.  d.  381,  therefore  decreed — 

"  That  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople  shall  have  the 
Primacy  of  Honor,  after  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  because 
that  Constantinople  is  New  Rome.'" 

The  Council  of  Chalcedon,  a.  d.  351,  also  decreed 
that — 

"  Following  in  all  things  the  decisions  of  the  Holy- 
Fathers,  and  acknowledging  the  Canon  [of  Constanti- 
nople just  read,]  they  do  also  determine  and  decree  the 
same  things  respecting  the  privileges  of  the  most 
Holy  city  of  Constantinople,  New  Rome.  For  the 
Fathers  properly  gave  the  primacy  to  the  Throne  of 
the  Elder  Rome,  because  that  was  the  imperial  city."2 

The  Emperor  Justinian  decreed  to  the  same  effect : 

"We  decree  according  to  the  decision  of  the  Can- 
ons, that  the  most  Holy  Archbishop  of  the  elder  Rome, 
should  be  altogether  first  of  all  the  Priests,  and  that  the 
most  Holy  Archbishop  of  Constantinople,  which  is 
New  Rome,  should  have  the  second  rank  after  the  most 
holy  Apostolic  throne  of  the  elder  Rome."3 

What  was  here  conferred  upon  the  Bishop  of  Rome, 
was,  however,  only  a  "  primacy  in  honor"  and  "  pre- 
cedence in  rank  ; "  it  was  no  superiority  of  jurisdiction 
and  conferred  no  authority  over  those  of  whom  it 
gave  him  the  right  to  take  the  precedence. 

§  8.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  at 
this  time,  was  bounded  on  the  North  by  the  Patriarch- 
ate of  Milan,4  that   is,   about   the  parallel    of  North 

1  Can.  iii.  3  Can.  xxviii.  3  Novell  131.  c.  2. 

4  I'heodoret  Eccl.  Hist.  B.  H.  c.  XV.  compared  with  Athanasius  Epist 
ftd  Solitar,  in  Bingham,  B.  IX.  c.  1. 


Ill] 


CHURCH   BEFORE  THE   REFORMATION. 


79 


Latitude,  44  degrees,  and  extended  south,  The  limits  of 
including  the  Peninsula  of  Italy,  and  the  M*a  ""*n^ 
Islands   of    Sardinia,   Corsica,    and    Sicily.  Bishops  of 

.  .  Rome   in   the 

Beyond  these  limits  he  was   not  acknow-  early  ages, 
ledged  to  have  any  more  authority  than  any 
other  foreign  Bishop  whatever. 

At  the  latter  end  of  the  fourth  century  the  Church 
was  thus  subdivided,  according  to  Bingham.1 

I.  The  Patriarchate  of  ) 
Antioch  with    .     .  J 
II.  Alexandria 

III.  Ephesus        .... 

IV.  Cesarea      .... 
V.  Heraclea,  afterwards 

Constantinople 


15  Provinces  &  15  Arbps. 


6 

u 

6 

u 

11 

a 

11 

u 

11 

it 

11 

a 

6 

a 

6 

u 

6 

a 

6 

u 

5 

tt 

3 

u 

7 

a 

4 

(( 

10 

a 

3 

u 

6 

a 

uncertain 

6 

<( 

6 

a 

VI.  Thessalonica 
VII.  Sardica 
VIII.  Milan      . 
IX.  Rome 

X.    SlRIMULM 

XI.  Carthage 
XII.  Spain,      Exarchate 
uncertain      .     . 
XIII.  Gtallia,    Exarchate 

uncertain 

XIV.   Great  Britain,  Exarchate  York,  if  any,  with 

five  provinces,  and  probably  three  Archbishops, 

York,  London,  and  Caerleon. 

The  foregoing  t.'iblr.  shows  the  subdivisions  of  the 

Hmrch  at  that  early  period,  and  it  will  be  useful  to 


17 


u 


it 


17 


u 


(( 


1  Aiiti(juiti.'s,  vtil.  iii.  p.  7.-1 -• 


80  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

bear  it  in  mind  when  we  come  to  read  the  following 
Canon  with  respect  to  encroachments  made  by  any 
ambitious  Bishop  over  other  parts  of  the  Church  than 
those  which  rightly  belonged  to  him. 
patriarchs        §  9.  In  almost   every  Council  anterior 

:™j™ to  that  at  EPhesus  a-  d-  431> there  had 

jurisdictu.^.  been  something  said  to  prevent  the  ambi- 
tion of  the  Bishops  from  going  beyond  their  limits  to 
extend  their  authority  over  others.  In  this  state  of 
things  the  Council  of  Ephesus  passed  the  following 
law  : — 

"  The  most  beloved  of  God  and  our  fellow  Bishop 
Rheginus,  and  Zeno,  and  Euagrius,  the  most  reli- 
gious Bishops  of  the  province  of  Cyprus,  who  were  with 
him,  have  declared  unto  us  an  innovation  which  has 
been  introduced  contrary  to  the  laws  of  the  Church 
and  the  Canons  of  the  Holy  Fathers,  and  which  effects 
the  liberty  of  all.  "Wherefore,  since  evils  which  effect 
the  community  [i.  e.  the  whole  Church]  require  more 
attention,  inasmuch  as  they  cause  greater  hurt,  especi- 
ally since  the  Bishop  of  Antioch  has  not  so  much  as 
followed  an  ancient  custom  in  performing  ordinations 
in  Cyprus,  as  those  most  religious  persons  who  have 
come  to  the  holy  Synod  have  informed  us,  by  writing 
and  by  word  of  mouth,  we  declare  that  they  who  pre- 
side over  the  holy  Churches  which  are  in  Cyprus, 
shall  preserve,  without  gainsaying  or  opposition,  their 
ri^ht  of  performing  by  themselves  the  ordinations  of 
the  most  religious  Bishops,  according  to  the  Canons  of 
the  Holy  Fathers,  and  the  ancient  custom.  The  same 
rule  shall  be  observed  in  all  the  other  Dioceses,  and  in 
the  Provinces,  everywhere,  so  that  none  of  the  most 


III.]  CHURCH   BEFORE   THE    REFORMATION.  81 

religious  Bishops  shall  invade  any  other  Province 
which  has  not  heretofore  from  the  beginning,  been 
under  the  hand  of  himself,  or  his  predecessors.  But 
if  any  one  has  so  invaded  a  Province,  and  brought  it 
by  force  under  himself,  he  shall  restore  it,  that  the 
Canons  of  the  Fathers  may  not  be  transgressed,  nor  the 
pride  of  secular  dominion  be  privily  introduced  under 
the  appearance  of  a  sacred  office,  nor  we  lose  by  little 
.  and  little  the  freedom  which  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
the  Deliverer  of  all  men,  has  given  us  by  His  blood. 
The  holy  and  oecumenical  Synod  has  therefore,  de- 
creed, that  the  rights  which  have  heretofore,  and  from 
beginning,  belonged  to  each  Province,  shall  be  pre- 
served to  it  pure  and  without  restraint,  according  to 
the  custom  which  has  prevailed  of  old,  each  Metropol- 
itan having  permission  to  take  a  copy  of  the  things 
now  transacted  for  his  own  security.  But  if  any  shall 
introduce  any  regulation  contrary  to  what  has  been 
now  defined,  the  whole  holy  and  oecumenical  Synod 
has  decreed  that  it  shall  be  of  no  effect."1 

Towards  the  close  of  the  ninth  century,  Leo 
Sapiens  the  Emperor,  caused  a  catalogue  of  the  Bish- 
oprics to  be  made.  This  is  given  by  Bingham. 9  The 
order  of  precedency  of  the  Patriarchates  is — 1.  Rome  ; 
2.  Constantinople;  3.  Alexandria;  4.  Antioch ;  5. 
.Klin,  or  Jerusalem.  Even  so  late  as  this,  England 
was  not  included  within  the  Patriarchate,  <>r  jurisdic- 
tion of  ELome.  I»ut  of  this  we  shall  see  more  when  we 
oome  to  speak  of  the  Reformation  in  England. 

$  10.    Thus    was   the    Church   of  Christ — while   it 


1  Cum.  viii.  Vol.  iii.  p.  1m*..  -t  scq. 

4* 


82  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

in  what  sense  constituted  one  Body,  one   Church,  divided 

one      Church  -,  1    t     •  j      i  i  1      •  •  r 

and  in  what  an<I  subdivided,  each  part  being  in  perlect 
sense    many  union,  communion,  and  harmony,  with  each 

Churches.  .  . 

other.  And  when,  therefore,  the  ancient 
writers  spoke  of  Churches  in  the  plural  number,  they 
always  meant  these  subdivisions,  one,  and  one  only, 
of  which  existed  in  the  same  place,  and  not  as  we 
now  do,  the  several  denominations  or  churches  in  the 
same  place. 

sketch  of  the       $11.  In  accordance  with  the  Principles 
Extension  of  already   discussed,  and  which  as  we  have 

the  Church  be-  J  . 

fore  the  Re-  seen,  were  entertained  by  the  Church  uni- 
formation.  versally,  the  communion  of  the  Church  was 
extended  from  its  first  establishment  up  to  the  time  of 
the  Reformation  with  a  progressive  growth  from  cen- 
tury to  century,  until  it  covered  the  whole  of  Europe — 
the  Western  part  of  Asia,  and  the  Northeastern  part 
of  Africa. 

Thus  the  Church  was  established  in  Asia  Minor  by 
the  Apostles  a.  d.  40-50.  St.  Mark,  the  Evangelist, 
established  it  in  Egypt.  In  the  fourth  century  Fru- 
mentius  was  consecrated  by  St.  Athanasius  as  the 
first  Bishop  of  Ethiopia.  And  in  the  same  century  the 
Grospel  was  preached  in  Armenia,  Iberia,  Thrace, 
Moesia,  and  Dacia.  Two  missionaries,  Columban  and 
Wilibord — the  former  from  Ireland,  and  the  latter  from 
England,  planted  the  Church  to  a  considerable  extent 
in  many  parts  of  G-ermany — Batavia,  Friesland,  West- 
phalia and  Denmark  in  the  seventh  century.  In  the 
eighth  century  Nestorian  Missionaries  from  Chaldea 
converted  the  Tartars.  In  the  ninth  century  the 
Church  made  its  way  into  Austria,  Sweden  and  Russia. 


IIL]  CHURCH    BEFORE   THE    REFORMATION.  83 

In  the  tenth  it  became  established  in  Poland,  Hun- 
gary and  Denmark.  Of  course  it  did  not  reach  the 
•  Western  Continent  until  the  sixteenth  century,  or  after- 
wards. 

Thus  we  see  that  the  Church  was  never  stationary — 
but  always  progressing  in  its  extension.  Many  of  the 
nations  which  we  have  named  above  were  not  wholly 
converted  at  the  time  specified,  and  the  work  of  their 
conversion  continued  many  years  (in  some  cases  more 
than  a  century)  before  it  was  completed. 

$  12.  The  ravages  of  Mahometanism  had     The  church 

°  •  divided  at  the 

obscured  and  greatly  marred  a  part  of  the  com  men  ce- 
Church,  and  the  strifes  between  the  Bishops  Reformat 
of  Rome  and  of  Constantinople  for  the  su-  Hon  i«t0  two 

-,  j       i    l     l    .  t     •    •         Grand      Divi- 

premacy  or  precedence  had  led  to  a  division  8ious. 
or  schism.  Russia  and  the  east  of  Europe, 
including  Greece  and  the  west  of  Asia,  and  the  north- 
east part  of  Africa  were  on  the  one  side,  and  Europe, 
from  Austria  west  was  on  the  other.  The  former  part 
is  usually  known  as  the  Greek  Church.  The  latter  as 
the  Western  or  Roman  Church. 

The  Roman  Communion  therefore  consisted  of 
several  national  or  provincial  Churches,  which  had 
been  brought  in  some  way  to  acknowledge  the  supre- 
macy of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  as  Pope.  He  and  they 
bad  arrogantly  appropriated  to  themselves  the  title  of 
"  Catholic,"  and  declared  obedience,  and  submission  to 
the  Pope  Indispensable  to  God's  favor. 

Among  those;  Churches  winch  had  been  brought 
into    this    Subjugation    was    the    Church    <>['    Knirland. 

Planted  in  thai  Island  in  the  days  of  the.  Apostles,  and 
probably  by  an  Apostle's  own   labors — St,  Paul — it 


84  THE   CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

maintained  its  perfect  freedom  from  all  foreign  juris- 
diction or  interference  for  four  or  five  centuries — until 
after  the  Saxon  invasion.  The  Island  was  then  recon- « 
verted  in  part,  by  Missionaries,  sent  thither  from 
Rome,  who,  of  course,  brought  with  them  a  Roman 
influence,  which,  by  one  means  and  another,  was  in- 
creased, until  near  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  Of 
course,  therefore,  the  Church  of  England  partook  of 
the  darkness  and  corruptions  of  the  middle  ages. 
While  the  Eastern  Churches  which  had  never  acknow- 
ledged the  Papal  Supremacy,  had  not  become  nearly 
so  corrupt.1 

At  the  Reformation  then,  we  have  the  Church  in 
what,  for  convenience  sake,  may  be  called  two  com- 
munions— the  Eastern  or  Greek,  and  the  Western  or 
Roman — nearly  equal  in  point  of  numbers — and  both 
equally  parts  of  the  original  vine,  planted  in  accor- 
dance with  the  Principles  to  which  our  attention  has 
been  called.  They  were  divided  by  events  that  oc- 
curred long  after  they  were  established,  and  not  by  the 
very  fact  of  their  origin.  The  Reformation — which 
took  place  in  a  part  of  the  Western  or  Roman  part  of 
the  Church — constituted  still  another  division,  as  we 
shall  soon  see,  so  as  that  after  that  event  the  whole 
Church  Catholic  will  be  found  divided  into  three  parts  or 
communions,  the  Greek,  the  Roman,  and  the  Reformed. 

§  13.  It  would  be  unnecessary,  so  far  as  the  prac- 
tical result  of  our  present  undertaking  is  concerned, 
to  refer  to  any  of  the  sects  which  existed  before  the 

i  The  independence  of  the  English  Church  of  the  Romish  Supremacy 
in  the  first  centuries,  and  the  means  by  which  that  supremacy  was  ac- 
quired, will  be  considered  more  at  length  in  a  future  Chapter. 


IIL]  CHURCH   BEFORE  THE    REFORMATION.  85 

Reformation,  were  it  not  for  the   fact,  that    Alltheear,y 

sects  bad   be 

some  of  our  modern  sects  refer  to  them,  come  extiuct 
and  especially  to  the  Waldenses  and  AlbU  or  Dearly  8°' 
g-enses,  as  the  link  of  visible  union  and  connection 
between  themselves  and  the  Primitive  Church  Catho- 
lic. These  sects  have  also  served  many  modern 
speculators  another  very  convenient  turn.  After  hav- 
ing come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Churches  in  the 
Roman  Obedience  are  apostate,  it  is  necessary  to  point 
to  something  that  might  be  regarded  as  the  continua- 
tion of  the  Church,  notwithstanding  this  apostacy  ; 
and,  as  if  forgetting  the  whole  Eastern  half  of  the 
Church,  these  writers  have  fixed  upon  the  Waldenses 
and  Albigenses  as  answering  the  demands  of  their 
theory.  It  becomes  necessary,  therefore,  for  these 
two  reasons,  to  give  these  Sects  a  passing  notice. 

§  14.  And  here  it  becomes  important  to   A  distinction 
call  attention  to  the  distinction  between  sects  between  "ecta 

in  the  Church 

in  the  Church  and  sects  out  of  the  Church,  and  sects  out 
A  sect  in  the  Church  is  a  class,  or  number  of  lt* 
of  persons,  holding  and  advocating  peculiar  views  of 
their  own,  but  without  separating  themselves  from  its 
communion,  or  attempting  to  hold  meetings,  form  con- 
gregations, and  have  a  ministry,  and,  in  fact,  becoming 
a  church  by  themselves.  They  may  be  denounced, 
excommunicated,  and  persecuted  with  inquisitions, 
lire  and  Bword  :  and  though,  in  the  oommou  use  of 
language,  they  most  be  called  a  sect,  yet,  notwith- 
standing nil  this,  they  map  be  only  the,  meek, 
uncompromising  adherents  to  the  Faith  once  delivered 
to  the.  Saints;  and  when  the  awards  of  the  final  day 

shall  show  every  man's  work   \\h;it  it   is — the)    will  be 


86  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

seen  with  the  crowns  of  confessors  and  martyrs  upon 
their  heads  shining  forth  forever,  like  stars  in  the  fir- 
mament of  (rod's  eternal  glory.  But  when  a  class  or 
number  of  persons,  holding  peculiar  views,  forsaking 
the  communion  and  fellowship  of  the  Church,  set  about 
originating  one  of  their  own,  with  separate  meetings 
and  congregations,  separate  ministers  and  ministra- 
tions, claiming  to  be  a  church  by  themselves,  they  are 
a  sect  outside  of  the  Church.  And  though  their  faith 
and  usages  may  be  in  perfect  accordance  with  the 
Apostlic  pattern,  yet  they,  as  a  church  or  society, 
are  new  and  distinct  from  that  which  existed  before 
them. 

There  were  sects  of  both  kinds  before  the  Reforma- 
tion ;  and  we  shall  probably  find  the  Waldenses  a  sect 
answering  to  the  former  description,  and  the  Albigenses 
one  answering  to  the  latter.  Those  of  the  earlier  cen- 
turies had  passed  away  and  become  extinct :  there 
were  also  some  divisions  among  the  branches  of  the 
Grreek  or  Eastern  Church.  But  with  neither  the  sects 
of  the  earlier  centuries,  nor  with  the  divisions  and 
alienations  of  the  Greek  Church  do  we  need  now  to 
concern  ourselves.  The  Albigenses  and  Waldenses 
seems  to  be  the  only  ones  that  demand  our  attention. 

The  albi-   §  15.  The  Albigenses  seem  to  have  been  a 
o  e  N  s  k  s.      gec^.  wk0  were  a£  grst  called  Paulicians,  and 

are  said  to  have  been  Manichceans  also  in  their  reli- 
gious opinions.  The  Paulicians  are  a  sect  "  said  to 
have  been  founded  in  Armenia  [a  country  in  Asiatic 
Turkey]  by  two  brothers,  Paul  and  John,  the  sons  of 
Callinice,  of  Samosata,  and  said  to  have  received  its 
name   from  them :  some,  however,  derive  it  from  one 


IIL]  CHURCH  BEFORE  THE   REFORMATION.  87 

Paul,  an  Armenian,  who  lived  in  the  reign  of  Jus- 
tinian II."1  About  the  middle  of  the  eighth  century, 
(752.  Cedrenus,)  Constantine,  surnamed  Coprony- 
mus  by  the  worshippers  of  images,  had  made  an  expe- 
dition into  Armenia,  and  found  in  the  cities  of  Melitene 
and  Theodosiopolis  a  great  number  of  Paulicians,  his 
kindred  heretics.  As  a  favor,  or  a  punishment,  he 
transplanted  them  from  the  banks  of  the  Euphrates  to 
Constantinople  and  Thrace ;  and  by  this  emigration 
their  doctrine  was  introduced  and  diffused  in  Europe."3 
"  From  Bulgaria  and  Thrace,  some  of  this  sect,  either 
from  zeal  to  extend  their  religion,  or  from  weariness  of 
Grecian  persecution,  removed  first  into  Italy,  and  then 
into  other  countries  of  Europe  ;  and  there  they  gradu- 
ally collected  numerous  congregations,  with  which 
the  Roman  Pontiffs  afterwards  waged  very  fierce 
wars."3  "  Albigesium  was  the  name  given  to  the 
whole  territory  of  the  Viscount  of  Albi,  Beziers,  Car- 
cassone,  and  Rasez.  Hence  Albigenses  became,  from 
this  time,  the  name, — at  first  for  all  those  who  fought 
against  the  crusaders,  and  then — for  the  Cathari*  or 
Puritans,  as  they  called  themselves." 

I  will  now  proceed  to  give  some  of  their  character- 
istic doctrines:  That  there  are  two  Gods  and  Lords, 
the  one  good,  the  other  evil;  that  the  creation  of  all 
tliinL's  visible  and  corporal  was  not  by  God  the  Father 
Almighty  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  but  by  the  Devil 

i  tfoem  im.     Book  [TLoent  i\-.,  P:irt  II..  cap.  v.,  Bee  2. 
•  (Iiiiiimv's  Decline  and  FalLCh.  LIV. 

*MoaOb      Cnit.  xi.  Part   1 1.,  cap,  v.,  MO.  2. 

<<;,:. mi.    Texl   Book  of  Boo.  i-t.  K.I.  Philadelphia,  L8M.     Vol. 
ii.  p.  386,  7. 


88  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

and  Satan,  the  evil  god,  who  is  the  god  of  this  world  ; 
that  all  Sacraments  are  vain  and  unprofitable.  As  to 
the  Eucharist,  they  believe  that  there  is  nothing  in  it 
but  mere  bread.  They  condemn  Baptism  by  water, 
saying  that  a  man  was  to  be  saved  by  the  laying  on  of 
hands  upon  those  that  believed  them.  They  allow  of 
no  ministry.  They  say  that  marriage  is  always  sin- 
ful and  cannot  be  without  sin.  They  hold  that  our 
Lord  did  not  take  a  real  human  bodv,  nor  real  human 
flesh  of  our  nature ;  and  that  He  did  not  really  rise 
with  it,  nor  do  other  things  relating  to  our  salvation. 
They  affirm  that  the  Virgin  Mary  was  not  a  real  wo- 
man, "  but  their  church,  which  is  true  penitence  ;  and 
that  this  is  the  Virgin  Mary."  They  deny  the  resur- 
rection of  the  body,  and  hold  that  human  souls  are 
spirits  banished  from  heaven  on  account  of  their  sins.1 

I  will  not  go  farther  into  an  account  of  this  sect. 
The  "  Facts  and  Documents  "  collected  by  Maitland, 
show  beyond  question,  that  they  were,  as  he  says, 
"  either  hypocritical  impostors,  or  misguided  fanatics," 
or  both,  aiming  at  no  good  for  mankind  ;  and  so  far 
from  being  characterized  for  true  piety  and  zeal  against 
the  errors  of  their  times,  they  were  given  to  sensuality 
and  selfishness. 

After  what  has  been  said,  it  will  hardly  be  neces- 
sary to  add  anything  more  to  show  that  no  modern 
sect  can  gain  anything  in  point  of  respectability  or 
ecclesiastical  identity  with  the  Church  of  Christ,  from 
an  alliance  with  the  Albigenses.  They  neither  claimed, 
nor  were  acknowledged,  to  be  a  part  of  that  identical, 

1  Abridged  from  Limboech,  in  Haitland's  Facts  and  Documents,  p. 
233-241. 


HI]  CHURCH   BEFORE  THE   REFORMATION".  89 

t 

visible  society  which  had  existed  from  the  days  of  the 
Apostles,  and  was  planted  by  their  labors. 

$  16.  "  The  early  history  of  the  Waldenses      The  Wal- 

.  .  -  DKNSES. 

is,  indeed,  involved  in  some  obscurity  ;   but 
it    seems   clear,    beyond    all    reasonable    doubt,   that 
they  owed  their  name,  and  their  origin  as  a  sect,  to  a 
certain  citizen  of  Lyons,  [Peter  Waldo,]  who  lived  at 
the  latter  half  of  the  twelfth  century  [1160.]     It  ap- 
pears, also,  that  he  caused  the  Scriptures  to  be  trans- 
lated into  the  vulgar  tongue  ;  that  he  and  his  immedi- 
ate followers  drew  upon  themselves  the  censure  and 
persecution  of  the  Church,  not  only  by  taking  upon 
them  the  office  of  teaching,  but  by  some  of  the  doc- 
trines which  they  taught."1     "  It  does  not  appear  that 
Waldo  and  his  immediate  followers  contemplated  a 
separation  from  the  Church,  but  rather  a  revival  of 
personal  religion  within  its   pale,  and  a  removal  of 
some  abuses   and  superstitions.     *     *     *     It  seems 
clear,  from  the  statements,  or  (what  is  even  more  im- 
portant) the  silence,  of  their  persecutors  and  their  own 
confessions,  (that  is,  from  all  the  sources  of  informa- 
tion that- we  possess,)  that  opposition  was  not  directed 
against  some  of  the  peculiar  doctrines  of  the  Romish 
Church."2     For  instance,  they  held  firmly  to  the  doc- 
trine of  Transubstantiation,  and  believed    that   each 
individual    could    perform    the  service  of   the    Mass. 
Their  is  reason  to  believe  that  Waldo  designed  to  form 
a  in-w  religious  I  Irder,  like  the  Blonka  or  Priare,  under 
the   sanei i. .it  of  the   ELomish  See,  but   failed   in  his 
object. 

We  have  before  us,  then,  the  Waldenses,  or  a  sect 

1  Maiti.and'h  Facte  and  Documents,  p.  407.  Q  p.  -10U. 


90  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

within  the  Church,  differing  in  many  respects  from  its 
doctrines,  yet  agreeing  with  it  in  many  of  its  peculiar 
characteristics — submitting  to  its  opposition  and  per- 
secution. But  besides  these,  many  of  them  were  scat- 
tered abroad  by  the  persecutions,  became  associated 
with  the  Albigenses,  and  were  dispersed  over  the  great- 
est part  of  Europe.  There  they  remained  until  the 
Reformation,  and  were  among  the  first  to  join  that 
movement.  This  fact  will  go  far  to  account  for  the 
confusion  of  names  which  so  often  occurs  in  speaking 
of  these  people. 

Of  that  part  of  the  followers  of  Waldo  which  joined 
the  Albigenses,  and  by  which  the  doctrines  of  the  lat- 
ter were  much  modified,  we  need  not  say  anything 
further.  Ecclesiastically  they  became  the  same 
"people"  a  part  of  the  same  sect,  bearing  the  same 
relation  to  the  identity  of  the  Church  as  the  Albigen- 
ses themselves. 

But,  of  the  other  part  of  the  Waldenses,  we  need 
say  nothing  further  than  that,  as  a  sect  in  the  Church, 
they  had  ceased  to  exist  before  the  commencement  of 
the  Reformation.  But  if  they  had  not,  they  would 
not  require  to  be  considered  as  a  distinct  branch  of  the 
Church,  since  they  formed  no  church  by  themselves. 

So  far,  then,  as  our  present  purpose  is  concerned, 
we  may  regard  these  two  sects,  that  is,  the  Albigenses 
and  the  Waldenses,  except  that  portion  of  them  which 
never  separated  from  the  Church  of  Lyons,  as  being 
but  one.  Shall  we  now  claim  for  them  the  name  and 
character  of  a  Church,  properly  so  called  ?  They  were 
not  the  Church  of  Albigesium — that  Church  was  estab- 
lished  long  before  the  emissaries  from  Thrace  came 


ni]  CHURCH   BEFORE  THE  REFORMATION.  91 

thither  with  their  peculiar  doctrines ;  they  neither 
claimed  nor  received  communion  with  the  Church  of 
Albi — were  in  no  way  merged  in  or  identified  with  it 
while  they  remained — but  always  continued  to  be  a 
distinct,  a  rival,  and  an  opposing  body.  They  were  a 
sect  of  human  origin  at  the  first,  and  that  they  con- 
tinued to  be,  until  they  were  lost  in  the  sects  which 
arose  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation. 

§  17.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  nothing  m      The8e 

7  .  D  Sects    formed 

can  be  gained  by  any  modern  sect  in  the  no  Legitimate 
point  of  identity  with  the  Church  of  Christ,  ^eacnhc^ceD>of 
from  a  connection  with  the  Albigenses  or 
Waldenses.  They  constituted  no  distinct  part  of  the 
Church — no  branch  of  the  original  vine.  As  a  church 
they  had  not  existed  from  the  Apostle's  days,  in  a  dis- 
tinct individual  capacity  ;  and  therefore  they  were 
not  of  Apostolical  origin.  They  never  were  in  com- 
munion with  any  part  of  the  Apostolical  Church  for 
a  moment,  from  the  very  commencement  of  their  exis- 
tence as  a  sect.  They  never  held  or  claimed  the  eccle- 
siastical jurisdiction  of  any  one  portion  of  the  habited 
globe  ;  but  were  always  a  sect  living  within  the  limits 
of,  and  in  opposition  to,  a  branch  of  the  Church  whose 
catholicity  was  unquestioned  by  them,  and  whose 
right  to  jurisdiction  is  undeniable. 

The  efforts  of  Waldo  and  his  immediate  followers, 
so  far  as  they  aimed  only  at  a  reformation,  and  the 
restoration  of  pure  religion,  oannol  fail  to  elicit  our 
most  oordiaJ  sympathy.  But  we  musi  noi  attribute  to 
him  an  infallibility,  nor  lei  our  admiration  and  appro- 
bation of  his  course  follow  him  any  farther  than  he 
followed    the   only  infallible  Standard   ami    Guide   of 


92  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

human  actions.  I  readily  concede,  that  his  views 
were  a  vast  improvement  upon  the  Church  dogmas  of 
the  age  and  country  in  which  he  lived.  But  when  he 
consented  to  become  the  founder  of  a  sect — to  lay  an 
"  other  foundation "  whereon  for  others  to  build — he 
violated  a  fundamental  law  of  Grod,  which  every  sect 
and  denomination  of  our  land  sanctions  by  its  own  use. 
It  is  the  law  of  unity.  Take  the  case  of  any  village 
or  community  in  which  there  is  a  parish  of  Presbyte- 
rians, Baptists,  Methodists,  or  Congregationalists  even, 
sufficient  to  accommodate  all  the  persons  of  that  way 
of  thinking  in  that  place,  and  where  there  is  no  pros- 
pect of  an  increase  of  numbers,  and  what  they  have  are 
only  sufficient  for  the  support  of  the  ministrations  of 
the  one  parish :  and  none  of  these  denominations  will 
allow  their  members  to  form  a  new  parish  in  that 
p-lace — necessarily  weakening,  as  it  will  the  old  one — 
presenting  an  occasion  for  inevitable  rivalry,  oppo- 
sition, and  contention,  between  those  who  are  thus 
unnecessarily  divided.  The  organized  seceders  would 
not  be  recognized  in  such  a  case  as  a  church  of  their 
denomination,  nor  allowed  a  seat  in  their  Council, 
Presbytery,  Conference,  or  whatever  may  be  the  name 
by  which  they  designate  their  deliberative  body  next 
above  the  parish. 

Now,  assuredly  we  cannot  deny  that  the  Church  of 
Christ  has  the  power  which  these  sects  claim  for  them- 
selves to  preserve  its  unity,  and  protect  itself  from  the 
identification  with  itself  of  other  bodies  heterogeneous 
to  its  own,  and  containing  principles  fundamentally 
repugnant  to  those  on  which  its  existence  depends. 

I  am  aware  that  I  have  given  an  account  of  the 


Ill]  CHURCH   BEFORE   THE   REFORMATION.  93 

Waldenses   and  Albigenses  somewhat  different  from 
those  which  are  the  most  popularly  received.       The 
truth  of  the  case  is,  that  but  little  has  been  known 
about  these  sects  until  quite  lately.     And  writers  who 
felt  the  awkwardness  of  their  position  in  advocating 
the  ecclesiastical  character  of  churches  unconnected 
with  the  past,  as  well  as  those,  who,  though  they  were 
in  no  such  position,  were  nevertheless  bent  on  mak- 
ing out  the  theory  that  regards  the  Church  of  Rome 
as  the  Anti-christ  spoken  of  in  the  Scriptures,  and 
needed  these  sects  for  the  "  two  witnesses,"  have  seized 
upon  here  and  there,  a  fact  or  an  isolated  expression, 
and  in  some  cases  even  drawn  upon  their  fancy  for 
facts,  to  make  out  such  an  account  of  them  as  would 
best  subserve  the  purposes  of  their  respective  theories. 
But  the  publication  of  "  the  Facts  and  Documents" 
relating  to  them  by  Mr.  Maitland,  has  revealed  a  state 
of  facts  which  yields  but  little  support  to  those  theo- 
ries, and  has  completely  dissipated  the  hopes  of  their 
advocates.     It  is  from  this  source  that  the  foregoing 
account  of  those  mediaeval  sects  has  been  chiefly  de- 
rived. 

§  18.  Before  proceeding  any  further  in  our  h™cn^turbc£ 
attempt  to  identify  the  Church  since  the  come  apostate. 
Reformation,  in  order  to  make  our  way  per- 
fect ly  sure  before  us,,  we  must  pause  and  consider 
whether  the  Church  had  become  apostate  at  or  before 
the  time  when  the  Reformation  commenced.  That 
darkness,  gross  darkness,  corruption,  and  superstition, 
had  covered,  as  it  were,  the  face  of  the  earth,  admits 
of  no  denial.  It  is  the  opinion  of  some,  that  "there 
was  a  time  when  the  Church  was  so  essentially  cor- 


94  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED  [Chap. 

rupt,  that  she  ceased  to  be  a  Church  of  Christ,  and  her 
officers  ceased  to  be  ministers  of  Christ."  If  so,  then, 
any  connection  with  the  past,  through  that  channel, 
can  be  of  no  avail. 

We  might  here  enter  a  plea  of  exception  in  favor 
of  the  Eastern  Churches,  on  the  ground  that  they  were 
not  involved  in  the  same  corruptions  as  the  Churches  as 
in  the  Roman  Obedience.  But  it  is  unnecessary  to 
attend  to  that  suggestion  here,  for  several  reasons. 
Those  that  bring  this  charge  against  the  Churches  in 
the  Roman  Obedience,  extend  it  also  to  those  in  the 
East.  And  besides,  none  of  the  sects  that  we  shall 
notice  claim  to  have  been  derived  from  the  Eastern 
Church. 

Now,  looking  at  the  Church  simply  as  a  visible 
society,  we  may  say  that  it  is  not  apostate,  or  extinct, 
so  long  as  it  has  within  itself  the  powers  of  recovery 
and  reformation.  If  it  has  the  Ministry  and  the 
Scriptures,  it  is  competent  to  all  the  ecclesiastical 
fuctions  necessary  to  life  and  vigor.  Now,  that  the 
Churches  in  the  Roman  Obedience  were  capable  of 
reformation,  is  a  position  that  has  never  been  denied, 
that  I  know  of,  and  I  presume  it  never  will. 

That  the  §  19.  In  the  Book  of  the  Prophet  Daniel1 
notUapOSt^  is  a  prediction  that,  at  a  time  then  sufficiently 
proved  from  indicated,  "the  (rod  of  Heaven  would  set 

the  Scriptures.  ,  . 

up  a  kingdom,  which  shall  never  be  destroy- 
ed ;  and  the  kingdom  shall  not  be  left  to  other  people, 
and  it  shall  stand  for  everP 

Now,  when  we  remember  that  the  time  indicated 

1iL44. 


Ill]  CHURCH   BEFORE   THE   REFORMATION.  95 

in  this  prophecy  was  the  time  of  our  Saviour — that, 
in  the  Gospels,  the  religious  society,  or  estate,  which 
He  had  come  to  establish,  is  called  the  kingdom  of 
God — how  He  began  by  preaching  that  the  kingdom 
had  come1 — how  he  declared  to  His  disheartened  fol- 
lowers, for  their  encouragement,  "  Fear  not,  little  flock, 
for  it  is  your  Father's  good  pleasure  to  give  unto  you 
the  kingdom,"2 — and  how,  as  He  left  the  world,  he  ap- 
pointed unto  His  Apostles  a  kingdom  as  His  Father 
had  appointed  unto  Him3 — there  seems  to  be  no  room 
left  to  doubt  that  the  kingdom  spoken  of  by  the  Prophet 
Daniel  was  the  one  established  by  our  Lord  and  His 
Apostles,  and  is  what  we  and  they  generally  call  the 
Church.  If  so,  the  declaration  of  the  Prophet  is  con- 
clusive proof  of  two  points: — namely,  that  the  Church 
will  not  be  destroyed,  become  apostate,  or  cease  to  ex- 
ist as  Christ's  Church  ;  and  secondly,  that  it  will  not 
be  left  or  given  to  another  people — that  it  always  will 
exist,  and  always  may  be  traced  or  identified,  by  follow- 
ing the  history  of  "  the  people  "  to  whom  it  was  at  first 
given,  and  of  whom  it  then  consisted. 

I  might  enlarge  upon  the  bearing  of  this  text,  upon 
the  importance  of  the  identity  of  the  Church,  and  upon 
the  mode  of  identifying  it  which  I  have  pointed  out  in 
the  foregoing  sections,  and  intend  to  pursue  in  those 
that  follow.  But  leaving  all  this,  I  will  refer  only  to 
its  bearing  on  the  one  point  before  us.  It  proves  that 
the  Church  bad  noi  become  extinot,  or  lost  its  ecclesi- 
astical character  ai  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  and 
will  never  become  apostate. 

»  Mark  i.  11.  'x  Luke  xii.  32.         3  Luke  xxii.  29. 


96  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Again  :  Our  Lord  declared  of  His  Church,  that  the 
gates  of  Hell  should  not  prevail  against  it.1  This  pas- 
sage implies,  at  the  least,  that  the  Church  should  not 
become  extinct.  If  the  language  refers  merely  to  a 
function  of  the  Church,  namely,  that  it  should  conduct 
to  final  salvation  all  souls  that  should  be  committed  to 
its  care  and  guidance,  despite  all  the  powers  of  Hell  to 
the  contrary — yet  it  must  continue  to  be  the  true 
Church  of  Christ,  in  order  to  perform  that  function,  as 
long  as  the  function  itself  is  to  fye  performed  ;  that  is, 
until  the  Second  Advent. 

Once  more :  As  our  Lord  was  ascending  to  Heaven, 
He  promised,  "  Lo,  I  am  with  you  always,  even  unto 
the  end  of  the  world."2  "Always"  in  the  Greek,  is 
"  every  day" — t«?«5  t«,$  foegotf. 

In  other  connections,  a  very  important  question 
might  here  be  raised,  whether  this  promise  was  made 
to  the  Apostles,  or  to  the  Church  at  large.  But,  for 
our  present  purpose,  the  question  is  of  no  consequence  ; 
for  if  the  promise  was  to  either,  it  was  to  both ;  since 
the  Ministry,  as  long  as  they  were  to  continue  at  all, 
must  remain  in  the  Church,  and  inseparable  from  it. 

If  then  the  Lord  has  promised  to  be  with  the 
Church  or  its  Ministry,  "  always,  every  day,"  unto 
the  end  of  the  world,  it  has  not  become  apostate.  It 
is  not  apostate,  while  He  is  with  it ;  and  His  promise  is 
for  "  every  day  unto  the  end  of  the  world." 

We  may  then  admit  that  the  Church  had  become 
very  corrupt,  at  the  commencement  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, without  entertaining  any  fear  that  it  had  become 

1  Mat.  xvi.  1 3  a  Mat.  xxviiL  20. 


IIL]  CHURCH   BEFORE  THE    REFORMATION.  97 

apostate,  or  ceased  to  be  the  Church  of  Christ — the 
people  to  whom  the  Kingdom  was  given,  and  against 
which  the  gates  of  Hell  should  not  prevail,  and  with 
whom  He  would  be  alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the 
world. 

$  20.  I  am  aware  that  it  has  sometimes  The  promises 
been  said  that  the  promise  has  been  fulfilled  camiot  be  fui- 
by  the  springing  up  of  a  new  church  when-  fUed  by  tran9" 
ever  the  old  one  had  become  apostate.  Thus 
it  is  said  that  the  Albigenses  and  Waldenses  came 
into  existence,  as  the  deadening  influences  of  apos- 
tacy  were  creeping  over  the  Church,  and  when  these 
sects  became  extinct,  the  Baptists  and  others  arose 
in  their  place — and  thus  the  divine  promise  has 
been  fulfilled,  and  there  has  always  been  a  church 
professing  the  pure  doctrines  of  the  Gospel. 

The  doctrinal  purity  of  these  sects  is  not  a  point 
that  I  wish  now  to  discuss.  But  the  divine  declara- 
tion is,  that  "the  Kingdom  shall  not  be  left  to  other 
people."  And  our  Lord  spoke  of  that  Church  which 
was  established  in  His  days,  when  He  said  that  "  the 
gates  of  Hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it,"  and  He 
promised  to  be  "  with  it  alway,  (every  day,)  even  unto 
the  end  of  the  world."  The  promise  could  not,  there- 
for.-, be  fulfilled  by  these  sects  rising  up  in  the  place 
of  the  Church  after  it  had  beeome  apostate.  Nay,  it 
was  to  guard  the  minds  of  Christians  against  admit- 
ting t he  idea  thai  the  ( Shuroh  could  beoome  apostate — 
or  tli.it  any  sect  could  .iris,-  np  to  take  its  place,  in  the 
Divine  Economy,  that  these  declarations  were  made. 
"  The  gates  of  Hell,"  says  our  Blessed  Saviour,  "shall 
never  prevail  against  that  Church  which  /  build  upon 
5 


98  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

this  Rock — I  will  be  with  you  alway  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world,  and  when  others  come  in  my  name 
doing  many  wonderful  works l  and  saying, '  Lo  here  is 
Christ  or  Lo  there,'2  you  will  not  believe  them,  neither 
go  after  them,  for  false  prophets  and  false  Christs  will 
come  and  show  great  signs  and  wonders  insomuch  that, 
if  it  were  possible  they  will  deceive  the  very  elect." 
The  promise  implies  the  identity  of  the  Church  to 
which  it  was  made.  It  cannot  be  transferred  to  any 
other  without  utterly  disregarding  the  language  in 
which  it  was  made.  Nay,  the  very  promise  proves 
that  the  Chnrch  never  can  become  apostate,  and  there- 
fore no  sect  can  arise  to  fill  its  place  in  the  Divine 
Economy.  Such  a  thing  would  show  that  the  divine 
purpose  had  failed,  the  Omniscient  Foresight  had  erred 
in  its  predictions,  and  the  Arm  of  Omnipotent  Power 
had  not  been  able  to  defend  His  Church  against  the 
gates  of  Hell. 

The  analogy  *  21.  The  analogy  of  the  Jewish  history 
of  the  Jewish  seems  to  me  to  be  in  point.  That  Church  be- 
came very  corrupt  at  several  periods  in  its 
history ;  but,  notwithstanding,  it  did  not  cease  to  be 
(rod's  covenant  people.  We  might  mention  several 
periods  when  it  was,  perhaps,  fully  as  corrupt  as  the 
Churches  in  the  Roman  Obedience  at  the  commence- 
ment of  the  Reformation,  and  yet  it  ceased  not  to  be 
the  Church  of  (rod. 

Thus  in  the  reign  of  King  Ahaz,  b.  c.  728,  the 
idolatrous  religion  of  the  Syrians  was  introduced  even 
into    Jerusalem  itself     Altars  were   erected   to  the 

1  Matt.  xxiv.  24.  Q  Mark  xiil  21. 


ILL]  CHURCH  BEFORE   THE   REFORMATION.  99 

Syrian  gods,  or  idols.  The  Temple  itself  altered  in 
many  respects  according  to  a  Syrian  model,  and 
finally  it  was  shut  up  entirely.1  Manasseh,  b.  c.  644, 
upheld  idolatry  by  all  the  influence  of  regal  power, 
erected  idolatrous  altars  even  within  the  Temple  itself, 
set  up  an  image  which  was  worshipped  with  obscene 
rites,  maintained  a  herd  of  necromancers,  astrologers, 
and  soothsayers  of  various  kinds,  and  even  sacrificed 
his  own  son  to  the  idol  Moloch.2  And  it  appears  that 
at  the  commencement  of  the  reign  of  Josiah,  b.  c.  611, 
"  the  book  of  the  law  of  the  Lord," — that  is,  the  Scrip- 
tures— was  almost  wholly  forgotten,  and  its  contents 
unknown.  Hilkiah  appears  to  have  discovered  it 
among  the  rubbish  in  the  Temple,  and  brought  it  to 
Shaphan  the  scribe,  who  examined  its  contents,  and 
then  brought  it  to  the  king,  and  read  it  before  him. 
"And  it  came  to  pass,  when  the  king  had  heard  the 
words  of  the  book  of  the  law  that  he  rent  his  clothes."  8 
The  whole  account  seems  to  imply  as  gross  and  as 
total  an  ignorance  of  (rod's  revealed  will  as  could  pos- 
sibly have  prevailed  in  the  Christian  Church  before 
the  commencement  of  the  Reformation.  Even  Hilkiah 
the  high  priest,  seems  to  have  known  almost  nothing 
of  it. 

The  New  Testament  gives  hardly  a  better  account 
of  the  state  of  religious  knowledge  and  opinion  among 
the  Jews  in  our  Saviour's  time.  It  is  represented  as 
"  teaching  for  doctrines  the  commandments  of  men,"4 
and  "making  the  word  of  Gcd  of  none  effect  through 
their  traditions." 

•Jaiin's  Bob.  Commonwealth,  Book  V.  g  It  i-\ 

»2  Kiuga  xxii.  11.  '  Man.  I:..  9.  «  Mark  7.  18 


10o  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

And  yet  the  Jews  were  recognised  and  treated  by 
our  Saviour  as  the  covenant  people  and  Church  of  God. 
For  this  reason  the  Gospel  was  first  preached  to  them  ; 
and  it  was  not  until  after  they  had  rejected  the  Messiah, 
crucified  Him,  and  even  refused  to  believe  after  He 
had  risen  from  the  dead  and  sent  the  Holy  Ghost,  thus 
completing  all  the  evidence  that  could  be  given — that 
they  became  apostate  from  God,  and  cast  off  by  Him. 
Then,  and  then  only,  were  they  abandoned  to  their 
impenitence  and  hardness  of  heart. 

It  was  not,  therefore,  by  their  ignorance,  as  in  the 
days  of  Josiah,  nor  by  their  idolatry,  as  in  the  days  of 
Ahaz  and  Manasseh,  that  they  became  apostate, 
(though  for  these  things  they  were  sorely  punished  by 
the  Babylonish  captivity.)  It  was  not  by  their  super- 
stition and  hypocrisy,  as  in  the  days  of  our  Saviour — 
it  was  not  even  for  crucifying  Him  as  a  malefactor, 
that  they  fell  from  the  estate  to  which  they  had  been 
called.  But  it  was  for  refusing  to  believe  in  Him 
after  the  fulness  of  evidence  had  been  rendered  com- 
plete by  the  miraculous  gifts  poured  out  on  them  that 
believed,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  that  they  ceased  to 
be  the  chosen  people  of  God. 

§  22.  From  the  foregoing  reference  to  the 

Apostacy  a         D 

defined.  case  of  the  Jews,  we  shall  be  able  to  derive 
some  idea  of  what  is  properly  an  apostacy.  And  in 
fact  it  will  be  necessary  to  get  a  pretty  definite  idea  of 
what  is  an  apostacy,  before  we  can  satisfactorily  settle 
the  question  now  before  us. 

Apostacy  is  not  merely  a  great  declension  in  doc- 
trine and  in  manners.  It  is  something  more,  and 
implies  a  total  falling  away  from  the  Christian  estate, 


IILJ  CHURCH   BEFORE  THE   REFORMATION.  101 

or  covenant  with  God.  A  writer  of  great  authority, 
has  defined  apostacy  to  be  "willingly  casting  off,  and 
utterly  forsaking  both  profession  of  Christ,  and  com- 
munion with  Christians." ' 

And  this  definition,  I  apprehend,  is  as  good  as  can 
be  found.  It  corresponds  with  the  etymological  mean- 
ing of  the  word,  and  with  its  use  in  the  New  Testament. 
The  word  itself  indicates  an  outward  act,  rather  than 
an  inward  change  of  opinions  or  character. 

Thus,  people  may  apostatize  from  the  Church,  by 
separating  from  it,  and  forsaking  its  communion  al- 
together. They  may  carry  with  them  the  Scriptures — 
they  may  (possibly)  hold  all  the  articles  of  the  Chris- 
tian Faith — they  may  administer  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper  among  themselves — and  whatever  may 
be  their  condition  before  their  final  Judge,  they  are 
none  the  less  apostates  from  the  Church  than  if  they 
had  not  made  any  pretence  of  holding  to  the  Faith. 

But  when  a  Church,  or  any  branch  of  it,  refuse  to 
receive  the  Bible  as  the  word  of  God — and  to  acknow- 
ledge tin-  Christian  Faith  altogether — or  if,  instead  of 
the  Christian  Scriptures,  they  should  substitute  the 
Alcoran,  or  the  writings  of  Plato,  as  their  chief  au- 
thority and  guide  to  faith  and  practice,  they  would  of 
course  apostatize  from  Christ. 

But  there  may  be  much  corruption  and  sin,  much 
ignorance  and  degrading  superstit  ion,  without  apostaoy. 

(23.   It   cannot  therefore  be  contended  that  the 

Church    was    apostate   before   the    lie  fori  nation.       It    is 

probable  thai  we  have  been  bo  much  accustomed  to 

1  Eooxxa'fl  '/'«"'  Sermon*.    Bern  I.   $  11. 


102  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

The  state  of  dwell  upon  its  errors  and  corruptions  that 
the  church  in  these   features   in  its   character  have   con- 

respect  to 

apostacy  be-  tributed  more  than  their  ptoportion  to  the 
formation.  *"  impression  that  we  have  received  of  it.  At 
all  events,  we,  for  the  most  part,  have  heard 
but  little  said  of  those  facts  and  features  which  go 
to  show  that  it  was  not  apostate. 

Now,  how  much  soever  the  legends  of  the  saints, 
and  the  fabulous  accounts  of  miracles  may  have 
usurped  the  place  of  the  Scriptures  in  their  public 
services — yet  the  Church  had  never  professed  to  reject 
the  Scriptures  as  the  Word  of  Grod — they  rather  used 
these  legends  and  notions  because  they  supposed  that 
they  enforced  what  was  contained  in  the  Scriptures. 
They  set  up  images  and  pictures  in  their  churches 
and  chapels — but  it  was  only  because  they  supposed 
that  these  things  helped  the  devotions  of  the  unlearned 
and  were  deserving  of  some  reverence  on  account  of 
their  connection  with  what  was  truly  the  proper  object 
of  worship.  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  were  not 
repudiated,  nor  neglected  in  their  essential  elements, 
though  grossly  misunderstood,  and  the  administration 
of  them  loaded  down  with  superstitious  and  foolish 
ceremonies.  The  Creed  which  had  been  adopted,  and 
had  received  the  sanction  of  the  whole  Church,  before 
the  division  of  the  East  and  the  West,  known  at  the 
present  as  the  Nicene  Creed,  had  never  been  repu- 
diated, nor  had  any  professed  departure  from  it  been 
made,  or  proposed  as  a  thing  that  was  allowable.  And 
the  Council  of  Trent,  1546,  begins  by  "setting  forth 
a  confession  of  faith,"  and  recites  the  Nicene  Creed, 
"as  that  symbol   of  Faith  which  the   holy  Roman 


m.]  CHURCH   BEFORE   THE   REFORMATION.  103 

Church  makes  use  of  as  being  that  principle  wherein 
all  who  profess  the  Faith  of  Christ,  necessarily  agree, 
and  that  firm  and  only  foundation,  against  which  the 
gates  of  Hell  shall  never  prevail."  ' 

Likewise,  in  the  ordination  of  the  Ministry,  though 
many  unworthy  men  were  doubtless  ordained,  yet  the 
Church  took  good  care  to  secure  the  outward  forms  of 
ordination,  so  as  that  the  succession  should  not  be  lost. 

But  perhaps  the  strongest  proof,  on  the  whole,  that 
they  were  not  apostate,  is  the  fact  that  a  consciousness 
of  their  errors  and  corruptions,  and  a  desire  for  reforma- 
tion  were   so   prevalent,  and    so   frequently    and  so 
forcibly  expressed.     When  a  people  are  apostate,  they 
have  forsaken  God,  and  He  has  forsaken  them.     Their 
prayers  are  no  longer  heard.     Their   sacraments  are 
unaccompanied  by  any  spiritual  grace.     Their  disci- 
pline  is    without    authority,    and    all     the    ordinary 
influences  of  the  Spirit,  are  withholden.  But  the  grace 
to  confess  their  sins,  and  to'repent,  is  always  proof  that 
the  Spirit  of  God  has  not  erased  striving  with  a  people. 
There   were  doubtless  hundreds   and   thousands  who 
notwithstanding  all  their  errors  and  ignorances,  did 
nevertheless,  in  meekness  and  sincerity  of  heart,  devote 
themselves  to  do  the  Lord?s  will.     The  accounts  of  the 
Church   in  that  age  with  which  we  have  been  most 
familiar,    have    oonie    to    us    through    an    unfriendly 
channel  just  asatthe  present  day  we  often  receive  ac- 
counts of  the  Knglish  Churoh  by  persons  unfriendly  to 
it,  which  would  lead  us  to  Buppose  thai  there  oould  be 
nothing  good    in  it,  if  we  did  not    know   from  other 

'  s.-.  in. 


104  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

sources  that  those  accounts  are  an  inadequate  repre- 
sentation of  the  subject.  The  humbie,  the  meek,  the 
self-denying,  who  labor  to  be  quiet,  and  do  their  own 
business  as  the  Lord  hath  appointed  them,  seldom 
occupy  a  conspicuous  place  on  the  page  of  the  historian 
or  the  traveller. 

I  freely  grant  that  there  was  great  ignorance  of 
the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus — that  their  use  of  pictures 
and  images  was  idolatry — their  prayers  to  the  saints  a 
bestowing  upon  the  creature  the  glory  that  was  due 
to  Grod  alone — that  their  view  of  the  Mass  was  in- 
consistent with  the  Atonement — their  doctrine  of 
Purgatory  unscriptural — their  views  of  absolution,  of 
works  of  supererogation,  and  many  others  that  we 
might  name,  were  such  as  tended  to  render  the  com- 
mandments of  God  of  none  effect.  But  still  they  were 
not  worse  than  the  Jews  had  been — they  had  not 
willingly  and  confessedly  forsaken  God,  and  they  had 
the  grace  to  see  their  need  of  repentance  and  reforma- 
tion, and  many  of  them,  at  least,  to  set  about  it. 

$  24.  There  is  one  important  consideration 

The  position  l 

of  the  Roman  in  relation  to  this  subject  to  be  derived  from 
riaily'changed  tne  history  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  This 
by  the  council  Council  was  not  held  until  after  the  Reforma- 
tion had  commenced.  The  English  Church 
took  no  part  in  it,  and  never  assented  to  its  doings.  Now, 
until  this  Council,  the  Churches  in  the  Roman  Obedi- 
ence were  not  committed  to  many  of  the  worst  abuses 
and  corruptions  which  were  then  incorporated  into  their 
Rule  of  Faith.  These  abuses  and  corruptions  were  in 
existence,  and  had  been  approved  and  allowed  by  Pro- 
vincial Councils ;  but  their  formal  adoption  of  them, 


Ill]  CHURCH   BEFORE   THE    REFORMATION.  105 

as  necessary  to  salvation,  at  the  Council  of  Trent,  put 
the   whole   Roman   Obedience   into   an   entirely  new 
position  in  its  relation  to  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ. 
And  it  would  certainly  be  much  more  difficult  to  de- 
fend it  against  the  charge  of  apostacy  since  that  Coun- 
cil than  before ;   that  is,  since  the  Reformation,  than 
before.     Until  that  time,  they  were  historically  a  part 
of  "  the  people  "  to  whom   the  Kingdom  was  given — 
they  had  the  Ministry  and  the  Scriptures,  and  they 
had  not   formally  and  professedly  set  forth  any  new 
Rule  of  Faith  peculiar  to  themselves,  and  excluding 
from  the  Christian  estate,  or  condition,  all  who  do  not 
adopt  their  Rule.1     But  this  Creed  was  not  adopted 
until  after  the  Reformation ; — and  whatever  may  be 
its  effects  upon  the  position  of  those  that  have  adopted 
it,  its  adoption  by  the  unreformed  does  by  no  means 
involve  the  reformed   branches  of  the  Church  in  its 
legitimate  consequences. 

k  25.  In  conclusion,  I  will  use  the  Ian-  Dr  Lathrop 

quoted. 

guage  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Lathrop,  late  of  West 
Springfield,  Mass.  The  origin  of  the  passage  is  worthy 
of  note.  He  and  his  people  had  been  imposed  upon 
by  a  man  claiming  to  be  a  minister  of  Christ.  The 
Doctor  wrote  two  sermons  on  Matt.  vii.  15, 16,  ["  Be- 
ware of  false  prophets,"  &c.,]  in  which  he  occupied 
nearly  the  whole  of  the  first  Sermon  in  proving  that 
"they  who  refuse  to  enter  into  the  ministry  in  the 
way  which  t he  Gospel  prescribes,  are  to  be  rejected  : 
they  have  one  plain  mark  of  false  teaohers."  The 
doctor  considers    "the  way   which    the   Q-ospel    pre- 

i  I  refer  to  the  Oreedof  Rue  IV.,  A.  I).  lf>r>'.»,  which  will  be  given  in  a 
■obeequooi  Section, 

5* 


106  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

scribes  "  to  be,  ordination  by  those  that  were  in  the 
ministry  before  them.  Perceiving  that  this  position 
implied  the  necessity  of  an  Apostolic  Succession,  and 
that  the  validity  of  such  a  succession  depended  upon 
the  Church's  not  having  become  apostate  before  the 
Reformation,  he  adds  to  his  sermons  an  Appendix,  in 
which  he  discusses  these  points  : 

"  Did  the  first  Reformers,  distrusting  their  past 
ordination,  receive  one  from  their  lay  brethren  ?  The 
contrary  is  most  evident.  The  Protestant  Reformers 
in  England  early  drew  up  a  confession  of  their  faith, 
in  which,  as  Dr.  Burnet  says,  '  they  censure  any  who 
should  take  upon  them  to  preach,  or  administer  the 
sacraments,  without  having  lawfully  received  the  power 
from  the  ministers,  to  whom  alone  the  right  of  confer- 
ring that  power  doth  appertain.'  Certainly  they  had 
no  apprehension  that  the  ministerial  succession  was  at 
an  end 

"  Though  corruptions  early  began  in  the  Christian 
Church,  yet  their  progress  was  gradual  and  slow.  In 
every  age  many  dissented  from  them  ;  great  opposition 
was  made  to  them,  and  large  councils  of  Bishops  or 
ministers  condemned  them.  The  Western,  or  Roman 
Church  ultimately  carried  her  corruptions  to  a  more 
extravagant  height  than  the  Oriental,  or  Greek  Church ; 
but  even  in  the  former,  they  never  came  to  their  crisis, 
until  the  famous  Council  of  Trent,  which  was  opened 
more  than  twenty  and  closed  more  than  forty  years  after 
the  besrinninsr  of  Luther's  Reformation.  That  Council, 
called  by  the  Pope's  bull,  and  supported  by  the  Emper- 
or's arms,  in  opposition  to  the  Reformers  established, 
as  Dr.  Tillotson  says, '  several  articles  which  had  never 


IIL]  CHURCH   BEFORE   THE    REFORMATION.  107 

before  been  acknowledged  by  any  general  council. 
Those  new  articles,  if  avowed  by  some,  yet  had  not 
been  generally  received  in  their  full  extent,  as  now 
declared.  If  they  had  been  decreed  by  one  council,  it 
was  but  a  partial  one,  and  they  were  soon  after  con- 
demned by  another;  and,  therefore,  were  not  to  be 
considered  as  the  received  and  acknowledged  doctrines 

of  the  Church 

"  Luther  and  his  associates,  in  their  first  opposition 
to  the  errors  of  the  Roman  Church,  did  not  consider  her 
as  having  essentially  departed  from  the  Grospel,  or  as 
being  utterly  disowned  by  Christ ;  for  their  primary 
object  was  not  to  withdraw  from  her,  but  to  effect  a 
Reformation  by  means  which  might  preserve  the  gen- 
eral union.  They  never  renounced  her,  until  they  and 
their  adherents  were  excommunicated,  and  all  hopes 
of  union  were  cut  off;  but,  on  the  contrary,  demanded 
a  free  and  general  council,  to  deliberate  on  means  of 
accomplishing  the  Reformation  so  much  desired. 
When  Luther  was  constrained  to  disclaim  that  Church, 
Dr.  ICosheim  observes,  'he  separated  himself  from  it, 
only  as  it  acknowledged  the  Pope  to  be  infallible;  not 
from  the  Church,  considered  in  a  more  extensive  sense  : 
for  he  submitted  to  the  decision  of  the  universal 
Church,  when  that  decision  should  be  given  in  a  gen- 
eral oounoil,  lawfully  assembled.'  'This,'  says  Or. 
Maolaine,  '  was  a  judicious  distinction  ;  for  though  the 
papacy  was  confounded  with  the  Catholic  Church 
[Roman,]'  they  were  in  reality,  different  things.     Tin- 

1  It  is  surprising  to  see  bow  generally  writers  have  igrepd  m  ap» 
plying  t<>  the  Roman  branch  of  the  Church  tin*  title  "Catholic"  w  Inch 
belongs  to  the  whole  Church,  as  though  the   Etonian  were  the  whol-a 

ninl  only  Church, 


108  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  Chap. 

papacy  had,  indeed,  by  degrees,  incorporated  itself 
into  the  Church;  but  it  was  a  preposterous  sup- 
plement, and  as  foreign  to  its  genuine  constitution  as 
a  new  citadel,  erected  by  a  successful  usurper,  would 
be  to  an  ancient  city.' 

"  One  cannot  but  feel  the  striking  contrast  between 
those  ancient  reformers  who  labored  to  correct  the  er- 
rors, without  breaking  the  union  of  the  Church,  and 
certain  modern  pretenders,  who  in  the  first  instance 
separated  themselves  from  the  churches,  and  then  ex- 
claiming against  them  as  corrupt,  promote  and  en- 
courage divisions  in  them. 

"  It  will,  perhaps,  be  asked,  '  How  do  we  know  but 
the  first  Reformers  had  been  ordained  by  some  of  the 
vilest  men  in  the  Roman  Church  ? '  But  let  me  ask, 
How  do  we  know,  or  is  it  probable  this  was  the  case  ? 
The  Reformers  themselves  appear  to  have  entertained 
no  scruples  on  this  head.  Let  it  still  be  remembered, 
that  irregularity  in  ordinations  was  not  made  matter 
of  complaint  against  her;  and  that  her  corruptions 
had  not  so  recently  risen  to  their  height ;  and  that  she 
had  not  yet  established,  by  a  general  council,  her 
grossest  errors,  nor  expunged  her  purest  members. 

"  But  admitting  that  a  man  of  corrupt  principle 
and  morals,  acts  in  an  ordination,  will  his  character 
nullify  the  transaction  ?  As  long  as  the  Scribes  sat  in 
Moses'  seat,  Christ  acknowledged  them  as  officers  of 
the  Jewish  Church ;  nor  did  He  deny  the  authority  of 
the  High  Priest,  though  his  personal  character  was  far 
from  recommending  him. 

"  The  person  ordained  derives  his  authority  to 
preach  from  Jesus  Christ;  not  from  the  men  who  or- 


III.]  CHURCH   BEFORE  THE   REFORMATION.  109 

dain  him.  They  indigitate  the  person  to  be  vested 
with  this  authority,  and  officially  instal  him  in  the 
regular  exercise  of  it ;  but  it  is  Christ's  Gospel,  not 
their  will,  which  must  direct  him  in  the  execution  of 
his  office.  If  they  are  corrupt  in  principles  or  man- 
ners, it  will  not  thence  follow  that  he  must  preach 
heresy  or  immorality.  He  is  ordained  to  preach  the 
Gospel ;  and  whoever  may  ordain  him,  the  charge 
which  he  receives,  and  the  vow  which  he  makes,  bind 
him  to  teach  not  the  commandments  of  men,  but  all 
things  whatsoever  Christ  has  commanded."1 

I  am  sure  my  readers  will  pardon  this  long  quota- 
tion from  one,  of  whom  it  has  justly  been  said,  "  Per- 
haps there  was  no  minister  in  the  whole  circle  of  the 
Congregational  churches  of  New  England  more 
respected  by  his  cotemporaries,  or  who  exercised 
greater  influence  among  them,"  when  he  says  so  much 
that  is  to  our  present  point  so  much  better  than  I  could 
say  it  myself. 

$26.    Suppose,  now,  that  it  be  admitted    There  m*v 

.  be  changts  in 

that  when  it  was  first  established,  the  Church  the  form   of 
was  materially  diiferent  in  its   constitution  Churih    s°l' 

J  ernmrnt  with- 

from  what  it  was  at  the  time  of  the  Reforma-  out  aposui.y. 
ti< in,  yet  it  is  impossible  to  regard  these  departures — 
if  they  are  to  he  considered  as  departures  from  the 
oriLrin;il  plan  at  ;ill — as  apostaoy — or  oeasinir  to  he  the 
Church  of  Christ — for  that  Church,  as  we  have  seen 
from  thr  Scriptures,  cannot  become  apostate,  Christ  is 
with  if,  always,  every  day,  even  unto  the  end  of  the 
world. 

I  am  well    aware  that    thr  i_rivat    body  of   the    Ro- 

1  \\'un\m;k;im\s  Ed   L844,  pp.  111—11'.' 


HO  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

formers,  and,  indeed,  of  the  Protestants  generally, 
have  regarded  the  Pope  as  the  Anti- Christ.  Without 
either  admitting  or  denying  the  correctness  of  the 
opinion  in  this  place,  I  will  only  say  that,  if  it  be  cor- 
rect, it  does  not  involve  the  conclusion,  or  admission, 
that  the  Churches  subject  to  him  are  apostate.  Whether 
the  Pope  be  Anti- Christ  or  not,  it  is  evident,  from  the 
Scriptures,  that  the  Anti-Christ  was  to  manifest  him- 
self in  the  Church  ;  and,  perhaps,  I  may  say  that  it  is 
equally  as  manifest,  on  a  careful  inspection  of  the 
prophecies  concerning  him,  that  the  Church,  over 
which  he  should  usurp  his  authority,  would  not  there- 
by become  apostate,  though  subjugated  to  an  anti- 
christian  power.  The  sheep  which  the  wolf  worries 
and  rends,  do  not  thereby  become  wolves.  Nay,  if 
the  Pope  is  Anti- Christ,  the  very  Reformation,  which 
was  a  refusing  to  hear  and  obey  him,  is  proof  that  the 
part,  at  least,  which  reformed,  was  not  apostate,  or 
involved  in  his  condemnation. 

The  com-  $  27.  We  now  come  round  again  to  the 
parative  size  point  that  we  occupied  at  the  close  of  a  pre- 
Grand  Divis-  ceding  section.  At  the  commencement  of  the 
ions   of   the  Reformation  the  Church  of  Christ  was  separa- 

Church.  t  m  * 

ted  into  two  communions.  The  Oriental 
Church  prevailed  in  Russia,  Liberia,  Poland,  Euro- 
yean  Turkey,  Servia,  Moldavia,  Wallachia,  Greece, 
the  Archipelago,  Crete,  Cyprus,  the  Ionian  Islands, 
Georgia,  Circassia,  Mingrelia,  Asia  Minor,  Syria, 
Palestine,  and  Egypt.1  The  Western  Church,  or  the 
Roman  Obedience  included,   therefore  the   whole  of 

1  Palmer's  Treatise  on  the  Church,  Vol  I.  p.  176,  N.  Y.  Ed.  1841. 


IIL]  CHURCH   BEFORE   THE   REFORMATION.  m 

Europe,    west   of   Russia,    Poland,    and    European 
Turkey. 

Palmer  in  his  Treatise  on  the  Church,1  has  enter- 
ed into  an  interesting  calculation  of  the  relative  por- 
tions of  the  Church  that  adhered  to  the  two  heads  of 
this  division.  As  the  result  of  his  computation,  he 
says :  "  It  is  impossible  to  determine  precisely,  the 
number  of  Bishops  on  each  side  ;  but  there  is  neither 
proof  nor  presumption,  that  the  majority  of  the  Church 
took  part  with  the  Roman  Pontiff  against  the  Greeks  : 
and  it  is  impossible  to  affirm  with  any  certainty  that 
the  Western  Churches  were  greater  than  the  Eastern, 
up  to  the  period  of  the  Reformation." 

1  Vol  I.  p.  198,  et  seq. 


CHAPTER  IY. 


THE    REFORMATION    IN    ENGLAND    AND    ITS     EFFECTS    UPON 
THE    CONDITION    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Among  the  separate  and  distinct  subdivisions  of 
the  early  Church,  that  of  England  was  one.  Nothing 
in  history  is  more  certain  than  the  perfect  and  entire 
independence  of  the  English  Church  of  any  foreign 
Bishop  or  Church  for  the  first  five  hundred  years.  The 
best  proof  of  this  is  found  in  the  history  of  the  mission- 
ary labors  of  Augustine. 

The  church        $  1-  ^  is  not  perfectly  certain  who  first 
planted  in  introduced  the  Gospel  into  England.     The 
st.  Paul.        earliest  and  most  reliable  testimony  refers  to 
St.  Paul. 

In  the  first  century,  Clement,  (of  whom  mention  is 
made  in  Philippians  iv.  3,)  the  friend  and  fellow  labor- 
er of  St.  Paul,  says :  "St  Paul  published  righteous- 
ness through  the  whole  world,  and  in  so  doing,  went 
to  the  upmost  bounds  of  the  west."1 

Stillingfleet 2  has  shown  that  this  expression  was 
very  generally  used  to  include  England. 

In  the  second  century,  Irenseus,  who  had   seen 

i  tor/  to  Tt^/uet  t«c  Avtrecoc.     Ep.  ad.  Cor. 
2  Origines  Britannicce.     Ed.  1841,  pp.  38,  39. 


Chap.  IV.]     THE   REFORMATION  IN   ENGLAND,  H3 

St.  John,  and  was  a  disciple  of  Polycarp  the  disciple  of 
St.  John,  said  that  the  Apostles  propagated  Christiani- 
ty among  "  the  Celtic  nations,"  that  is,  Germans,, 
Gauls  and  Britons. 

But  perhaps  the  best  and  most  explicit  testimony 
is  that  of  Eusebius,  the  great  and  the  earliest  Church 
historian,  who  was  familiar  with  and  wrote  an  account 
of  all  that  was  done  up  to  his  time,  that  is,  through  the 
first  three  centuries.  He  says,  that  some  of  the 
Apostles  passed  over  the  ocean  "  to  the  British  Islands." ' 

Jerome,  in  the  fourth  century,  says  that  St.  Paul 
having  been  in  Spain,  preached  the  Gospel  "  in  the 
Western  parts;"  an  expression,  as  I  have  just  re- 
marked, generally  used  to  denote  Great  Britain. 
Theodoret  and  Venantius  still  later,  testify  to  the  same 
Bttint. 

'This  is  but  a  small  part  of  the  testimony,  more  or 
less  direct,  to  this  point.  It  is  sufficient,  I  apprehend, 
to  establish  the  point  that  the  Gospel  was  established 
in  Britain  in  the  Apostolic  age,  and  probably  by  St. 
Paul  himself. 

$  2.  On  this  point  1  will  quote  the   fol-     Th0  ,nde~ 

1  x  pendence  or 

lowing    very    pointed    argument    from    the  the  early  E»g- 
Rev.  J.  A.  Spooner's  "  Catholic  saved  from  Ushc,lurch- 
Popery" 

"On  this  point,  of  the  independent  character  of 
ilic.  Church  of  England,  I  will  be  content  with  quoting 
the  testimony  of  only  a  Roman  Catholic  writer.  It  is 
the  testimony  of  Lingard^  given  in  his*  History  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  Church,1  and  when  it  la  known  that 

•  'lirl   rue  x*\ou//i*ac  B^tTTinxxc  »*Veuc.     Driii.    BnUlg.   lib  HI.  C  7. 


114  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Lingard  is  of  highest  literary  fame  as  an  accurate  his- 
torian, and  that  he  is  of  the  highest  repute  among 
Romanists,  the  last  ground  of  doubt  as  to  the  weight 
of  the  testimony  is  removed.  Testimony  of  over- 
whelming amount  might  be  drawn  from  Church  histo- 
rians, and  from  historians  unbiased  by  any  religious 
partialities ;  but  if,  foregoing  all  those,  the  point  can 
be  established  by  Romish  testimony  alone,  there  needs 
no  further  dispute.  The  edition  of  Lingard  from 
which  I  quote,  is  an  American  copy,  printed  by  the 
Romish  house  of  Fithian,  Philadelphia,  1841 ;  and 
the  two  points  which  I  shall  establish  from  that  histo- 
ry are,  1.  That  the  Church  was  established  in  Britain 
before  the  visit  there  of  any  Romish  missionary  ;  and 
2.  That  the  Church  in  Britain  was  independent  of 
Rome  after  the  establishment  in  Britain  of  the  nirt 
Romish  missionary,  Augustine. 

"  1.  The  Church  was  established  in  Britain  be- 
fore THE  VISIT  THERE  OF  ANY  RoMISH  MISSIONARY. 

"  (z.)  Lingard,  page  23,  states  that  the  first  mission- 
ary from  Rome,  the  Monk  Augustine,  found,  o  t  land- 
ing in  Britain — 1.  The  Queen  an  avowed  and  earnest 
Christian.  2.  A  church  edifice  outside  the  walls  of 
Canterbury,  which  had  been  built  by  Christians  at  an 
early  day,  and  recently  renewed  by  the  Queen.  3.  A 
Bishop,  Liudhard,  in  possession  of  that  church  by  the 
appointment  of  the  Q,ueen.  '  And  the  saintly  deport- 
ment of  Liudhard,'  says  Lingard,  '  reflected  a  lustre 
on  the  faith  which  he  professed.'  All  the  foregoing 
was  found  on  the  very  spot  where  the  first  Romish 
missionary  made  his  first  attempt  in  597.  Of  all  the 
farther  Church  arrangements,  which,  from  the  presence 


IV.]  THE   REFORMATION   IN   ENGLAND.  H5 

of  so  faithful  a  Bishop,  and  from  the  known  interest 
of  the  Q,ueen,  may  well  be  supposed  to  have  been  in 
other  parts  of  the  Island,  and  of  which,  much  indeed  is 
said  by  early  writers,  Lingard,  in  the  outset,  quietly 
says  nothing :  but  he  says  enough  to  reveal  the  exis- 
tence of  the  Church  in  Britain  before  the  Roman  mis- 
sionary went  there. 

"  Of  that  which  is  said  by  the  early  writers,  show- 
ing the  extent  of  the  Gospel  in  Britain,  we  may  take 
that  one  declaration  from  the  venerable  Bede,  a  Saxon 
ecclesiastic  and  historian  of  the  eighth  century,  where 
he  is  speaking  of  those  who  attend  the  council  to  meet 
Augustine.  Among  others  who  came,  (Book  ii.  ch.  2,) 
he  says,  '  Seven  Bishops  of  the  Britons,  and  many 
most  learned  men  came ;  particularly  from  their  most 
noble  monastery.'  And  Bede  adds,  that  monastery 
had  '  so  great  a  number  of  monks  that,  being  divided 
into  seven  parts,  none  of  those  parts  contained  less  than 
300  men.'  This  is  called  '  the  most  noble  monastery >> 
showing  there  were  others.  This  was  in  Mercia,  a 
hundred  miles  from  Liudhard  ;  and  if  one  monastery 
contained  so  many  when  Augustine  came,  how  preva- 
lent through  Britain  must  have  been  already  the  influ- 
ence of  the  Church ! 

"  (//.)  Lingard  states,  page  19,  that  a  synod  of 
British  Christians  was  held  at  Vorulam,  and  that  for 
the  purpose  of  checking  the  heresy  of  Pelagius;  and 
Pelagiufl  was  a  Welshman,  flourishing  between  400 
and  420.  Not  only  at  the  landing  of  Augustine,  then, 
in  598,  but  as  Ion-  .is  200  years  before,  the  Church 
was  so  prevalent  in  Britian  that  the  Christians  held  a 
synod,  and  which  synod  successfully  repressed  a  great 
heresy. 


U6  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

"  (in.)  Lingard  states,  page  18,  that  the  Christians 
in  Britain  were  persecuted  by  Dioclesian.  Now,  the 
persecuting  edicts  of  Dioclesian  were  issued  about  a. 
d.  300.  Not  only  200  years,  then,  but  so  long  as  300 
years  before  Augustine,  the  Christians  were  so  numer- 
ous in  Britain  as  to  excite  the  jealousy  of  the  Pagan 
government,  and  to  beget  its  persecuting  hostility. 

"  (iv.)  By  whom  was  Christianity  introduced  into 
Britain?  On  "the  testimony  of  an  ancient  and  re- 
spectable historian,"  Lingard,  page  1,  rests  the  plea, 
that  the  Apostles  planted  the  Church  in  Britain. 
Lingard  says,  '  see  Eusebius  (Dem.  Evang.  1.  i.  c.  7,) 
who  informs  us,  that  the  apostles  not  only  preached  to 
the  nations  on  the  continent,  but  passed  the  ocean  and 
visited  the  British  Isles.'  And  Lingard  adds,  '  Theo- 
doret  appears  to  assert  the  same  (Theod.  torn.  4.  p. 
610.')  Not  only  for  300  years,  then,  before  Augustine, 
but  for  six  hundred  years  before  Rome  sent  its  agents 
to  Britain,  the  Church  was  fully  established  and  exist- 
ing there. 

"  (v. )  But  which  of  the  apostles  planted  the  Church 
in  Britain  ?  The  Romish  polemics  have  been  naturally 
anxious  to  prove  that  St.  Peter  founded  the  Church 
in  Britain.  Catholic  writers,  the  Church  writers, 
have  been  assiduous  in  proving  that  the  Church  was 
founded  in  Britain  by  St.  Paul.  Lingard,  page  1, 
sums  up  the  matter  by  saying : 

M  '  The  former  '  (the  Papists)  '  relied  on  the  treach- 
erous authority  of  Metaphrastes  :  the  latter,'  (Church- 
men,) 'on  the  ambiguous  and  hyperbolical  expressions 
of  a  few  more  ancient  writers.' 

"  Lingard  has  here  said  the  best  for  Rome  and  the 


IV.]  THE   REFORMATION    IN    ENGLAND.  117 

worst  for  its  opponents  that  truth  permitted — and  how- 
much  ?  For  St.  Peter,  one  author ;  a  late  one  ;  and  he 
'  treacherous,'  that  is,  perfidious,  not  to  be  trusted. 
For  St.  Paul,  several  authors ;  they,  ancient  writers ; 
given  to  stating  things  '  hyperbolically,'  that  is,  figura- 
tively, or  in  a  large  way  ;  and  whose  statements  were 
*  ambiguous,'  that  is,  about  which  doubts  might  be 
entertained.  And  Lingard  has  said  the  worst  against 
the  Church  that  facts  would  allow.  Thus :  for  St 
Peter,  one  writer  ;  for  St.  Paul  several.  For  St.  Peter, 
a  modern  or  late  ;  for  St.  Paul,  early  writers.  For  St. 
Peter,  a  writer  not  to  be  believed ;  for  St.  Paul,  a  writer 
whose  statements  only  might  be  doubted.  By  Lin- 
gard, then,  all  authority  that  exists  is  in  favor  of  St. 
Paul ;  in  favor  of  St.  Peter,  none. 

"  So,  according  to  Lingard,  not  only  was  the  Church 
existing  in  Britain  600  years  before  the  Romish  monk 
was  sent  there ;  not  only  was  it  existing  there  quite  as 
early  as  it  did  at  all  at  Rome,  that  is,  from  the  very 
da  \  B  of  the  Apostles,  but  it  was  also  established,  not  by 
St.  Peter,  but  by  him  '  who  was  not  a  whit  behind 
the  very  chiefest  Apostles,'  viz.,  by  St.  Paul.  It  there- 
fore was  not  only  begun  from  the  earliest  day,  but  it 
was  begun,  too,  in  entire  independence  of  Rome. 

"  (/'/.)  And  from  St.  Paul,  up  to  the  time  of  Augus- 
tine the  monk,  i.  e.  for  the-  first  (>00  years,  the  Church 
in  Britain  continued  independent  of  Rome.  One  faot 
given  by  Lingard  establishes  that  point  Augustine 
was  scut  from  Ii.ily  to  Britain  in  the  year596,  Lin- 
gard pictures  thai  work  as  the  going  forth  of  a  mis- 
sionary to  eonveri  a  heathen  land.  The  following  are 
his  words : 


118  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

"  <  Scarcely  had  the  Saxons  obtained  the  undisputed 
possession  of  their  conquests,  when  a  private  monk 
conceived  the  bold  but  benevolent  design,  of  reducing 
those  savage  warriors  under  the  obedience  of  the 
Gospel.' — Page  21. 

"  So  does  he  paint  Britian  as  heathen,  and  Augustine 
as  going  forth  to  convert  it.  And  Lingard  does  but 
echo  in  those  words  the  opinion  held  by  Gregory  him- 
self, (the  pope,)  and  by  whom  the  mission  was  set  on 
foot.  The  following  is  the  manner  in  which  Gregory 
appears  in  this  undertaking  : — 

"  '  Gregory,'  says  Lingard,  (  on  whom  the  venera- 
tion of  posterity  has  bestowed  the  epithet  of  the  great, 
chanced  (at  Rome)  to  pass  through  the  public  market 
at  the  moment  in  which  some  Saxon  slaves  were 
exposed  to  sale.  Their  beauty  caught  his  eye,  and  he 
exclaimed  with  pious  zeal,  that  '  forms  so  fair, ought  no 
longer  to  be  excluded  from  the  inheritance  of  Christ.'' — 
Page  21.  How  Gregory  came  to  know  the  country  of 
those  slaves,  and  that  their  land  was  heathen,  does  not 
well  appear  from  Lingard's  narrative.  But  Lingard 
quotes  from  Bede,  and  the  full  narrative  as  usually 
given,  and  as  given  by  that  historian,  does  interpret 
the  matter,  and  it  is  as  follows  : — 

"  '  Some  merchants,'  says  Bede,  i  having  just 
arrived  at  Rome  on  a  certain  day,  exposed  many 
things  for  sale  in  the  market-place,  and  abundance  of 
people  resorted  thither  to  buy  :  Gregory  himself  went 
with  the  rest ;  and,  among  other  things,  some  boys 
were  set  to  sale,  their  bodies  white,  their  countenances 
beautiful,  and  their  hair  very  fine.  Having  viewed 
them,  he  asked,  as  is  said,  from  what  country  or  nation 


IV.]  THE   REFORMATION   IN   ENGLAND.  H9 

they  were  brought  ?  and  was  told  from  the  island  of 
Britain,  whose  inhabitants  were  of  such  personal  ap- 
pearance. He  again  inquired  whether  those  islanders 
were  Christians,  or  still  involved  in  the  errors  of  pagan- 
ism ?  and  was  informed  that  they  were  pagans.  Then 
fetching  a  deep  sigh  from  the  bottom  of  his  heart, 
*  Alas !  what  pity,'  said  he,  '  that  the  author  of  dark- 
ness is  possessed  of  men  of  such  fair  countenances ; 
and  that  being  remarkable  for  such  graceful  aspects, 
their  minds  should  be  void  of  inward  grace.'  He  there- 
fore again  asked,  what  was  the  name  of  that  nation  ? 
and  was  answered,  that  they  were  called  Angles. 
1  Right,'  said  he,  '  for  they  have  an  angelic  face,  and 
it  becomes  such  to  be  co-heirs  with  the  angels  in 
heaven.  What  is  the  name,'  proceeded  he,  '  of  the 
province  from  which  they  are  brought  ?  '  It  was  re- 
plied, that  the  natives  of  that  province  were  called 
DeirL  '  Truly  are  they  De  iraf  said  he,  '  withdrawn 
from  wrath,  and  called  to  the  mercy  of  Christ.  How 
is  the  king  of  that  province  called  ?  '  They  told  him 
Ins  name  was  Aella  ;  and  he,  alluding  to  the  name, 
Baid,  '  Hallelujah,  the  praise  of  God  the  Creator,  must 

-niiLr  in  those  parts.' — Bede,  Eccl.  Hist.  Book  II , 
c/tt//>.  i. 

"Of  this  account  by  Bede,  Lingard  (page  21)  sa\  8, 
1  I  B66  no  reason  to  dispute  the  truth  of  this  anecdote. 
Bede  asserts  that  he  received  it  from  the  fathers;  ami 
no  nation  could  be  more,  interested  than  the  Saxons  n> 
preserve  the  memory  of  the  aooident  whioh  Led  to  their 
conversion.5  That  last,  word,  l  conversion,'  again 
shows  Lingard's  sympathy  with  the  feeling  thai  Bri- 
tain was  heathen.     Bui   not,  only  dors  Lingard — not 


120  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

only  did  the  Pope,  reckon  Britain  barbarous — the  mis- 
sionary Augustine  and  his  party  did  the  same.  After 
the  Pope  had  selected  the  missionaries,  Lingard  (page 
22)  says  of  them  : 

"  '  Animated  by  the  exhortation  of  the  pontiff,  the 
missionaries  traversed  with  speed  the  north  of  Italy, 
and  arrived  at  the  foot  of  the  Grallic  Alps ;  but  the 
enthusiasm  which  they  had  imbibed,  in  Rome,  insen- 
sibly evaporated  during  their  journey ;  and,  from  the 
neighborhood  of  Lerins,  they  despatched  Augustine, 
their  superior,  to  Gregory,  to  explain  their  reasons  for 
declining  so  unpromising  and  so  dangerous  an 
enterprise.' 

"  By  this  extract  from  Lingard,  it  is  not  quite  seen 
why  the  mission  appeared  to  Augustine  and  his  com- 
panions to  be  '  unpromising  and  dangerous  ; '  but 
Bede's  history,  from  which  Lingard  again  quotes, 
makes  the  point  ciear.  Bede  says  of  the  missionaries  : 
(Book  I.  chap.  23.) 

"  '  Having  in  obedience  to  the  Pope's  commands 
undertaken  that  work,  they  were,  on  their  journey, 
siezed  with  a  sudden  fear,  and  began  to  think  of  re- 
turning home,  rather  than  proceed  to  a  barbarous, 
fierce  and  unbelieving  nation.' 

"It  was  the  supposed  heathenism  and  wickedness 
of  the  land,  then,  which  terrified  and  stopped  them. 

"  Now  the  one  fact  given  by  Lingard,  in  these  last 
pages,  is  this,  viz  :  that  Augustine  and  the  Pope  con- 
sidered Britain  as  heathen  land.  And  the  point  I 
press  is  this,  viz  :  Could  it  have  been  so  considered,  if 
for  600  years  the  British  Church  had  been  under  the 
control  of  the  Pope  ? 


IV.J  THE    REFORMATION    IN    ENGLAND,  12 1 

"  The  fact  that  the  Pope  did  not  even  know  of  the 
existence  of  the  Church  in  Britain,  shows  that  he 
could  not  have  had  there  any  jurisdiction.  The 
Church  existed  fully  and  by  God's  Spirit  without  him. 

"  The  first  fact  which  I  asserted  then,  is  established 
by  the  Romish  writer,  Lingard,  viz:  that  the  Church 
existed  in  Britain,  and  independently  of  Rome,  before 
Rome  sent  its  agents  there  in  596.  And  the  further 
fact  is  also  established,  that  the  Church  was  founded 
in  Britain  by  St.  Paul — the  English  Church  is  there- 
fore an  Apostolic  Church ;  and  in  its  origin  and  con- 
tinuance, independent  of  Rome. 

"  While  you  are  now  most  ready  to  acknowledge 
and  to  reassert  this,  let  me  present  the  next  proposition, 
viz: 

"  2.  The  British  Church  was  also  independent  of 
Rome  after  the  visit  of  Augustine. 

"'All,'  says  Lingard,  (p.  35.)  '  were  not  animated 
with  the  spirit  of  the  pontiff.  The  Scottish  monks 
(who  had  produced  the  conversions  which  Augustine 
found)  had  been  taught  to  respect  as  sacred  every  in- 
stitution which  had  been  sanctioned  by  the  approba- 
tion of  their  ancestors,  while  the  Roman  missionaries 
contended  that  the  customs  of  an  obscure  and  seques- 
tered  people  ought  to  yield  to  the  consentient  practice 
of  the  principal  Christian  Churches.'  *  Each  party} 
concludes  Lingard,  l pertinaciously  adhered  to  their 

oi/'tf  opinions? 

"  Js  not  here,  in  the  very  first  movement  of  Augus- 
tine, a  distinction  from  ELome,  and  even  a  '  pertinacious' 
independence  of  Rome?     All  had  not  the  spirit  of  the 

Pont  ill.     One   body  was  led  by  the  Pope,    the  other 
6 


122  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

stood  arrayed  with  their  ancestors,  and  '  pertinaciously- 
adhered  to  their  opinions.'     Again : 

" '  The  British  Christians,'  says  Lingard,  (p.  37.) 
'  scattered  along  the  western  coasts  of  the  island,  ob- 
served in  the  computation  of  Easter  a  rule  peculiar  to 
themselves  ;  and  when  it  was  asked  how  they,  buried 
in  an  obscure  corner  of  the  earth,  dared  oppose  their 
customs  to  the  unanimous  voice  of  the  Greek  and 
Latin  Churches,  they  boldly  but  ignorantly  replied,  that 
they  had  received  them  from  their  forefathers,  whose 
sanction  had  been  proved  by  a  multitude  of  miracles, 
and  whose  doctrine  they  considered  as  their  most  val- 
uable inheritance.' 

"Here  again  the  British  Christians  stand  with 
their  forefathers  against  intruders;  they  recognize 
the  nationality  of  their  Church;  and  they  not  only 
feel  but  they  assert  its  independence  of  Rome.  The 
very  contempt  with  which  Lingard  speaks  of  them,  all 
along,  only  heightens  the  certainty  of  his  testimony  to 
their  undeniable  independence.     He  himself  felt  it. 

"  But  the  controversy  between  the  monk  Augus- 
tine and  other  Romish  agents  on  one  side,  against  the 
native  British  and  Scottish  Christians  on  the  other,  be- 
came more  and  more  earnest,  and  more  and  more  ab- 
sorbing.    Therefore  Lingard,  on  page  39,  says : 

"  '  If  uniformity  was  desirable,  it  could  only  be 
obtained  by  the  submission  or  retreat  of  one  of  the  con- 
tending parties ;  and  certainly  it  was  unreasonable  to 
expect  that  those,  who  observed  the  discipline  which 
universally  prevailed  among  the  Christians  on  the  con- 
tinent, should  yield  to  the  pretensions  of  a  few  obscure 
churches  on  the  remotest  coast  of  Britain.' 


IV.]  THE    REFORMATION   IN   ENGLAND.  123 

11  About  this  point  as  to  which  should  yield,  the  sons 
of  the  land  or  intruders,  I  offer  here  no  word  ;  I  quote 
Lingard  only  to  make  clear  one  fact,  the  professed  and 
acted  independence  of  the  British  Church.  That,  Lin- 
gard still  farther  exhibits  by  showing  (p.  38.)  that  a 
council  was  at  length  called  and  held  at  Whitby  in 
Northumbria,  for  the  very  purpose  of  settling  the  dif- 
ferences. In  Northumbria,  which,  says  Lingard,  'had 
received  the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  from  the  Scottish 
missionaries ; '  and  it  was  therefore  truly  their  own 
ground.  But  into  that  ground,  the  Romish  mission- 
aries had  forced  themselves ;  had  won  to  their  notions, 
not  the  king,  but  the  queen  and  her  son ;  and  then 
urged  a  council  to  bring  about  '  a  uniformity,' 
i.  e.  to  subject  to  themselves  that  country  which  they 
had  not  converted.  The  council  was  held  ;  and  Wil- 
frid defended  the  Roman  customs,  while  Colman, 
Bishop  of  Lindisfarne,  a  Briton,  defended  the  national 
customs.  But  no  unanimity  was  attained.  For,  says 
Lingard  : 

"  'When  Daganus,  a  Caledonian  Bishop,  arrived  at 
Canterbury  afterwards,  In  the  days  of  Lawrence,  the 
successor  of  Augustine,  he  pertinaciously  refused  to 
eat  ;it  the  Mime  table,  or  even  in  the  same  house,  with 
those  who  observed  the  Roman  Easter;  and  St.  Aid- 
helm  assures  ns  thai  the  olergv  of  Deiuefiu  carried 
their  abhorrence  of  the  Roman  discipline  to  suoh  an 
extreme  thai  they  punished  the  most  trivial  conformity 
with  a  long  course  of  penance^  and  purified  with  a 
fanatic  scrupulosity  evt  ry  uU  nsil  which  ka<l  fit '  ii  con* 
taminated  t>a  the  touch  of  a  Roman  priest." 

"The   wry    epithets    themselves,  abusive  as  they 


124  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

are,  which  Lingard  here  employs,  only  serves  to  show 
the  more  strongly  the  real  and  inflexible  independence 
of  the  British  Church.  The  Britons  seem  to  have 
been  so  strongly  irritated  by  the  papal  encroachments 
and  overbearing,  as  to  have  come  to  hold  the  papists  in 
real  religious  abhorrence. 

CD 

"  '  Gregory,'  the  pope,  '  lamented,'  says  Lingard, 
page  41,  '  and  sought  to  remedy  these  disorders  ;  and 
invested  Augustine  with  an  extensive  jurisdiction  over 
all  the  Bishops  of  Britain.'  But,  he  adds,  '  those  de- 
generate ecclesiastics  determined  to  refuse  all  connec- 
tion with  him.' 

"  Still,  you  see  the  same  independence.  And  it 
was  worthy  of  Britons.  It  was  worthy  of  Christians, 
begotten  in  the  Grospel  by  St.  Paul,  of  whom  the  Spirit 
had  declared  that  he  '  was  not  a  whit  behind  the 
chiefest  Apostles.'  (2  Cor.  ii.  5.)  But  that  act  of  marked 
rejection  was  not  all.  Augustine  persevered,  says 
Lingard,  and  by  the  influence  of  the  king,  '  prevailed 
on  some  of  the  British  prelates  to  meet  him '  in  con- 
ference. '  To  facilitate  their  compliance,'  continues 
Lingard,  '  Augustine  had  reduced,  (he  had  insisted  on 
more  than  showing  the  thorough  and  felt  difference 
between  Britain  and  Rome,  but  Augustine)  reduced 
his  demands  to  three :  that  they  should  observe  its 
orthodox  computation  of  Easter,  should  conform  to 
the  Roman  rite  in  the  administration  of  baptism,  and 
join  with  him  in  preaching  to  the  Saxons.'  Join  with 
him ;  that  is,  submit  to  the  control  which  the  Pope 
had  proposed  for  him.  But  Lingard  adds,  i  each  re- 
quest was  refused  and  his  metropolitical  authority  con- 
temptuously rejected?     And  this  last,  his  *  metropoliti- 


IV.]  THE   REFORMATION    IN    ENGLAND.  125 

cal  authority,'  shows  what  his  '  three'  demands  were; 
one  embraced  the  submission  of  the  British  Church  to 
Roman  control  in  the  headship  of  Augustine ;  and  the 
result  shows  the  yet  maintained  and  unstooping  inde- 
pendence of  the  Britons — they  rejected  each  request ; 
they  had  their  own  metropolitan  ;  they  constituted  by 
themselves  a  free  national  Church. 

"  That  independence  of  the  British  Church  is  shown, 
too,  (by  a  casual  remark  of  Lingard  on  page  44,)  to 
have  been  then  known  and  acknowledged.  Speaking 
of  the  supervisory  authority  given  by  the  Pope  to 
Augustine,  he  says : 

"  '  Its  jurisdiction  at  first  extended  no  farther  than 
the  churches  founded  by  Roman  missionaries.'' 

"  There  were,  then,  other  and  independent  churches. 
They  had  been  discovered.  And  by  that  limitation, 
we  see,  the  Pope  recognised  that  freedom  from  his 
jurisdiction. 

"  But  the  Church  existed  on  the  very  spot  where 
Augustine  landed;  yet  instead  of  withdrawing,  over 
that  Augustine  obtruded  Roman  authority.  The 
Church  was  already  planted,  too,  in  Northumbria,  and 
by  Scottish  missionaries,  yet  Augustine  forced  Roman 
a  a  I  ho  rili/  upon  it.  And,  in  spite  of  the  first  modest 
instructions  <>f  the  Pope,  that  the  Roman  jurisdiction 
was  to  be  limited  to  churches  founded  by  themselves, 
(instructions  which  tell  plainly  thai  the  independence 
of  the  British  Church  waa  known  at  Rome  and  recog- 
nised by  Rome,)  yel  the  days  before  Henry  VI I  L  tell 
how  entirely  thai  British  independence  had  been  sup- 
pressed, and  how  over  all,  thai  papal  jurisdiction,  by 
little  and  little,  had  been  pushed.     Bui  the  indepen- 


126  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

denoe  of  the  British  Church  was  a  fact — a  fact  known 
and  recognised  even  at  Rome,  (or  why  did  the  Pope 
refrain  from  interfering  with  their  jurisdiction?)  a  fact 
daily  and  annoyingly  seen  by  Augustine  and  his  suc- 
cessors ;  a  fact  which  the  indignant  acts  of  the  Britons 
constantly  asserted. 

"Yet  if  by  being  overpowered  the  British  Church 
grew  less  and  less  independent,  still  you  may  note,  and 
as  an  Englishman  you  may  note  it  proudly,  that  its 
independence  never  ceased  to  be  asserted.  In  satisfy- 
ing proof  of  that,  look  at  the  times  of  Wighard,  the 
sixth  after  Augustine.  He  had  been  sent  to  Rome  by 
the  kings  of  Kent  and  Northumbria  to  consult  the 
Pope  concerning  the  controversies  which  had  arisen 
among  the  bishops  of  the  party  of  Augustine.  He 
died  in  Rome.  Then,  says  Lingard,  the  Pope  Yitalian, 
'  seized  the  favorable  moment  to  place  in  the  see  ot 
Canterbury  a  prelate  of  vigor  and  capacity  ;'  that  is, 
one  of  his  own  reliable  countrymen.  Lingard  continues 
— '  He  sent  Theodore  of  Cilicia,  an  aged  monk.  The 
authority  which  Theodore  claimed  was  almost  unlim- 
ited. At  his  arrival  he  assumed  the  title  of  Archbishop 
of  Britain.'  (Had  Roman  missionaries  now  '  founded ' 
all  British  Churches  ?  You  see  the  wicked  and  un- 
scrupulous encroachments  by  little  and  little.)  '  The 
murmurs  of  opposition  (Lingard  states  it  softly,  but 
still  'opposition  ')  were  silenced  by  the  veneration  that 
his  character  inspired,  and  by  a  new  decree  of  the  Pope 
in  favor  of  Canterbury ;'  that  is,  the  Pope  bought  in 
adherents. 

But  that  claim  of  Archbishop  of  all  Britain  was  not 
allowed.     With  all  their  yet  remaining  strength,  the 


IV.]  THE   REFORMATION   IN   ENGLAND.  127 

Britons  opposed  it.  There  were  not  only  "  murmurs," 
but  "  after  the  death  of  Theodore,"  says  Lingard,  page 
44,  "  different  Bishops  attempted  to  assert  their  inde- 
pendence; and  the  successors  of  Augustine  had  more 
than  once  to  contend  with  the  ambition  of  their  suffra- 
gans. The  first  who  dared  to  refuse  obedience  was 
Egbert  of  York."  We  see  it ;  Lingard  cannot  keep 
back  the  fact,  that  British  resistance  to  Roman  intru- 
sion never  ceased  to  be  manifested ;  that  their  well 
known  and  sacred  independence  never  ceased  to  be 
declared. 

Again.  That  not  to  be  eradicated  feeling  was  ex- 
hibited not  only  by  the  Bishops,  but  it  was  as  strongly 
a-serted  and  maintained  by  the  Kings.  Let  us  turn 
our  thoughts  to  that  point.  Lingard,  page  48,  shows 
how  the  State  preserved  the  independence  of  the 
Church. 

"  As  soon  as  any  church  became  vacant,"  says  he, 
M  the  ring  and  crosier,  the  emblems  of  Episcopal  juris- 
diction, were  carried  to  the  King  by  a  deputation  of 
the  chapter  and  returned  by  him  to  the  person  whom 
they  had  chosen,  with  a  letter  by  which  the  civil  offi- 
cers were  ordered  to  maintain  him  in  the  possession  of 
the  lands  belonging  to  his  church." 

At  the  hands  of  the  King)  then,  and  not  from  the 
Pope,  the  sanction  of  Episcopal  jurisdiction  was  re- 
ceived. The  Pope  did  oftentimes  try,  unsuccessfully, 
to  interfere  with  thai  remnant  of  independence  before 
he  overcame  it.  Witness  that  kingly  exhibition  of 
British  independence,  in  the  case  of  AJdfred,  King  of 
Northumbria,  given  by  Lingard,  page  L15,  A  pro- 
vincial   Synod    hud    removed    Wilfrid,    a    bishop    of 


128  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

Northumbria,  from  his  episcopate,  for  certain  alleged 
faults,  and  the  king  had  given  his  sanction.  Wilfred 
gained  the  ear  of  the  Pope  ; — the  good  will  of  the  Pope ; 
— the  mandate  of  the  Pope  for  his.  restoration ;  and  cer- 
tain of  the  Northumbrian  clergy  brought  that  mandate 
to  the  King. 

"  '  My  brothers,'  said  the  King,  '  ask  for  yourselves, 
and  you  shall  not  be  refused.  But  ask  not  for  Wilfrid. 
His  cause  has  been  judged  by  myself  and  the  Arch- 
bishop, the  envoy  of  the  Apostolic  See  ;  nor  will  I 
change  that  judgment  for  the  writings  as  you  call  them 
of  that  See.' 

"  A  Christian  and  kingly  answer  ;  and  one  that  told 
not  only  of  a  consciousness  of  independence,  but  of 
will  and  ability  to  assert  it.  But  mark  here  a  note  of 
Lingard's. 

"  '  From  this  period,'  says  he,  '  the  use  of  appeals 
was  established  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church.' 

"  From  this  period  :  what,  then,  let  me  call  your 
attention  to  ask,  was  the  state  of  things  before,  but 
that  of  a  still  preserved  independence  under  their  own 
Kings  and  under  their  own  Synods?  This  last  vestige 
of  independence,  it  was,  that  Wilfrid  by  appealing  to 
the  Pope  was  instrumental  in  destroying.  Wilfrid  of 
Northumbria ;  Northumbria,  from  the  first  uncon- 
nected with  Rome,  the  longest  in  maintaining 
independence,  and  the  last  to  be  subdued.  The 
Italian  divided  it  into  factions  ;  got  one  party  to  appeal 
to  the  Pope  ;  and  so  subdued  it. 

"  In  thus  exhibiting  to  you,  my  brother,  the  indepen- 
dence of  the  British  Church,  and  its  opposition  to  Rome 
after  the  visit  and  the  encroaching  efforts  of  St.  Augus- 


IV.]  THE   REFORMATION   IN   ENGLAND.  129 

tine  and  his  co-operators,  I  have  confined  myself  to 
extracts  which  exhibited  the  fact  in  its  large  and 
general  aspect, — Britons  on  their  own  ground,  resisting 
the  aggressions  of  Rome,  a  foreign  power.  You  have 
seen  the  Papists  in  their  approach  resisted ;  in  their 
customs  resisted;  in  all  their  propositions  of  fellowship 
resisted  ;  in  the  social  matter  even  of  eating  at  the 
same  table,  indignantly  and  religiously  rejected.  You 
have  seen  a  great  English  unanimity  in  that  feeling 
of  hostility  to  Romish  intrusions;  people  and  synods, 
counties  and  dioceses,  Bishops  and  kings,  moved  by  a 
sometimes  despairing,  yet  always  noble,  and  never- 
dying  sense  of  original  and  rightful  and  God-given 
independence. n 

Thus  it  appears  that  about  the  middle  of  the  sixth 
century,  the  Saxons,  a  heathen  people  from  the  conti- 
nent, overran  the  whole  of  the  North  and  East  of  Eng- 
land. Gregory,  Bishop  of  Rome,  sent  Augustine  as  a 
missionary  to  convert  them.  On  his  arrival,  he  found 
thai  the  British  Church  remained  complete  in  itsorgan- 
ix.it inn,  and  in  full  operation  in  what  is  now  called 
Wales — or  the  western  part  of  England.  He  called 
their  Bishops  together,  seven  in  number,  and  had  a 
conference  with  them.  He  found  that  their  rites  did 
not  oorrespond  with  those  used  in  the  Church  of  Rome 
in  all  respects,  and  thai  they  had  never  acknowledged 
an)  dependence  upon  the  Roman  See.  He  then  pro- 
posed that  they  should  conform  and  acknowledge  the 
Bupretnaev  of  the  Ihshop  of  Rome.  Tins  they  posi- 
tively refused. 

The.  reply  was  given  by  DnrorH,  Abbot  of  Bangor^ 

as  follows  i 
6* 


130  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

"  Be  it  known  to  you  beyond  a  doubt,  that  we  are 
all  and  each  one  of  us,  obedient  and  subject  to  the 
Church  of  Grod  and  the  Pope  of  Rome,  and  to  every 
other  true  and  pious  Christian,  to  the  extent  of  loving 
each  of  them  in  word  and  deed,  as  the  sons  of  Grod  : 
but  other  obedience  than  this  I  do  not  know  to  be 
justly  [vindicari  et  postulari]  claimed  and  proved  to  be 
due  to  him  whom  you  call  i  Father  of  the  Fathers.'1 
And  this  obedience  we  are  willing  to  give  and  perform 
to  him  and  to  every  other  Christian  continually.  But 
for  anything  further,  we  are  under  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  Bishop  of  Cserleon  upon  the  Uske,  [now  St.  Davids] 
who  is,  under  God,  to  take  the  oversight  of  us  and 
make  us  pursue  a  spiritual  life."2 

Of  course  this  proof  is  conclusive  and  beyond  ex- 
ception. The  British  Church  up  to  that  time,  a.  d. 
601,  had  never  acknowledged  the  Roman  Primacy  or 
Supremacy  at  all,  in  any  form  or  to  any  extent — 
three  of  its  Bishops  were  at  the  Council  of  Aries,  a.  d. 
314.  St.  Anthanasius  says  also  that  there  were  three 
British  Bishops  at  the  Council  of  Sardica,  a.  d.  347 .3 

These  Councils  were  held,  the  one  in  the  South  of 
France,  the  other  was  in  what  is  now  called  European 
Turkey.  The  presence  of  her  Bishops  in  these  coun- 
cils, proves  that  the  Church  of  England  was  then  in 
communion  with  the  rest  of  the  Church. 

Augustine  and  his  company  went  on  with  their 
work,  and  the  British  Church  continued  its  separate 
existence  until  nearly  a  century  after,  when  the  whole 

1  A  title  which  Augustine  gave  to  the  Pope. 

2  Spellman's  Cone.  Brit.  an.  601. 

3  Apol.  Introduc.  §  1. 


IV.]  THE    REFORMATION    IN   ENGLAND.  131 

Island  had  been  reconverted  and  the  ancient  British 
and  the  converted  Saxons  were  again  united  into  one 
Church,  as  the  Heptarchy  had  been  united  under  one 
Monarch. 

$  3.  In  order  to  understand  this  subject  we        °nly  a 

J  small   part  of 

shall  need  to  go  back  a  little  and  consider  England  con- 
the  earlier  geography  of  England  and    the  !,erted ,by  the 

o      o      r    J  o  Romish    mis- 

English  Church.     At  the  time  of  our  earliest  sionaries. 
notices  of  the  English  Church,  England  was 
divided  into  Jive  secular  and  three  ecclesiastical  prov- 
inces. 

The  secular  provinces  were : 

1.  Britannia  Prima,  comprehending  the  country 
south  of  the  river  Thames  and  the  Bristol  Channel. 

2.  Britannia  Secunda,  comprehending  the  country 
between  the  Severn  and  the  Dee  rivers. 

3.  Flavia  Ccesariensis,  comprehending  the  coun- 
try northward  from  Britannia  Prima  and  east  of 
Britannia  Secunda,  as  far  north  as  the  Mersey,  the 
Don  and  the  Humber. 

4.  Maxima  dcsariensis,  comprehending  the  coun- 
try north  of  Flavia  Ccesariensis,  as  far  as  the  wall  of 
>'  verus,  which  stretched  across  the  country  from  the 
Solway  Firth  to  the  river  Tine  on  the  east  coast. 

5.  Vaientia,  or  Valentiana,  extended  north  of  the 
wall  of  Severas  to  the  rampart  of  Antoninus — extend, 
ing  across  the  isthmus  from  the  Firth  of  Clyde  to  the 
Firth  of  Forth.1 

The  Keelrsiastiea]   Provinces  were  then: 


1  Bee  Aimoii'i "  8y$tm  of  AmU  M  ami  MmM*al  ffyngfyfly/  PA 
169,  BOS,  80& 


132  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

1.  York,  on  the  north,  including  Valentia,  Maxima 
Ccesariensis,  and  Flavia  Ccesariensis. 

2.  London,  including  Britannia  Prima,  that  is, 
the  south  and  east  of  England. 

3.  C^rleon,  including  Britannia  Secunda,  that 
is,  Wales,  &c.  in  the  west  of  England. 

It  is  probable  that  the  See  of  York  had  the  prece- 
dence, and  probably  a  supremacy  over  the  others. 

In  a.  d.  449,  two  Saxon  leaders,  Hengist  and  Horsa, 
arrived  in  England — and  after  a  while  made  an  alli- 
ance with  the  Scots  and  Picts  on  the  north,  and 
subjugated  the  whole  of  England,  except  Britannia 
Secunda,  or  the  ecclesiastical  province  of  Caerleon. 
To  this,  therefore,  many  of  the  early  British  Christians 
and  Bishops  fled  for  refuge. 

After  the  Saxon  conquest,  all  of  England  (except 
Britannia  Secunda,  or  the  province  of  Ccerleon)  was 
divided  into  seven  kingdoms. 

1.  Northumbria,  on  the  North. 

2.  Mercia,  in  the  middle. 

3.  East  Anglia,  including  the  eastern  part  of 
Flavia  C&sariensis,  or  the  present  counties  of  Norfolk 
and  Suffolk. 

4.  East  Saxony,  or  Essex,  also  a  part  of  Flavia 
Ccesariensis,  south  of  East  Anglia,  and  including  the 
present  site  of  London,  the  counties  of  Essex,  Middle- 
sex, and  part  of  Hertfordshire. 

5.  Kent,  on  the  south-eastern  extremity  of  the 
Island,  including  (at  first)  the  present  counties  of  Kent, 
Middlesex,  Essex,  and  Surrey.  Canterbury  was  the 
capital  of  the  kingdom. 

6.  South   Saxony,  or  Sussex,  extending  from  the 


IV.l  THE    REFORMATION    IN    ENGLAND.  133 

kingdom  of  Kent  on  the  east — to  that  of  the  West 
Saxons,  on  the  west,  including  only  the  present 
county  of  Sussex. 

7.  West  Saxony,  or  Wessex,  extending  from  South 
Saxony  on  the  east,  westward,  including  the  present 
counties  of  Hampshire,  Dorsetshire,  Berkshire,  and 
Witshire.1 

These  kingdoms  were  all  merged  into  one  undi- 
vided sovereignty  under  Egbert,  King  of  the  West 
Saxons,  or  Wessex,  in  a.  d.  828. 

We  may  now  proceed  with  our  account  of  the 
conversion  of  England,  with  the  prospect  of  conveying 
a  distinct  idea  of  the  extent  of  the  obligation  under 
which  the  nation  was  laid  by  the  Romish  missionaries. 

Augustine  came  into  the  small,  but  powerful  king- 
dom of  Kent,  the  capital  of  which  was  the  present 
Canterbury.  The  wife  of  the  king,  Ethelbert,  was 
Bertha,  daughter  of  the  king  of  Paris,  and  a  Chris- 
tian. Augustine,  accordingly,  seems  to  have  found 
I, ut  little  difficulty  in  gaining  an  ascendancy  for 
Christianity  in  this  kingdom,  including  at  that  time 
only  the  present  counties  of  Kent  and  Surrey. 

lint  to  begin  on  the  North:  Northumbria  was 
converted  chiefly  by  the  exertions  of  Oswald,  one  of 
the  old   royal  family  who   had    been   educated  iii  Scot- 

land,  and  among  the  members  of  the  ancient  British 
Church.  A-idan,  a  distinguished  monk  from  what  is  now 
one  of  the  Hebrides,  was  the  principal  missionary. 
Final)  and  Colman  succeeded   him  the  one  after  the 


1  The  foregoing  locoanl  «>f  the  Bazoo  Beptarehj  dm  bees  darired 

dii.-flv  from  BmrVj  Hi-t.of  England    Vol  I.  pp  1 1  :*6. 


134  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

other.     Neither  of  these   had   any  connection  with 
Rome. 

Mercia  was  converted  by  missionaries  from  Nor- 
thumbrian who  were  of  course  of  the  Old  British  School. 

East  Anglia  was  chiefly  converted  by  Fursey,  an 
Irish  monk.  At  this  time  the  Irish  Church  was  wholly 
disconnected  from  Rome,  and  by  no  means  under  its 
influence  or  control. 

Essex,  or  East  Saxony.  Sigebert,  the  king,  had 
been  converted  at  the  Northumbrian  court,  and  on  his 
return  to  his  own  kingdom,  he  succeeded  in  gaining  for 
Christianity  a  permanent  establishment  there. 

Thus  do  we  see  that  the  only  part  of  England  that 
was  really  indebted  to  the  Romish  missionaries  for  its 
conversion,  is  that  which  is  south  of  the  Thames  and 
east  of  the  British  Channel,  including  only  a  part  of 
the  old  Britannia  Prima,  and,  of  course,  only  the 
same  portion  of  the  ecclesiastical  province  of  London, 
which  was  in  reality  but  a  very  small  part  of  England.1 

The  following  testimony  of  Neander,  a  Grerman 
Church  Historian,  may  be  worth  adding  to  what  has 
been  said  :  "  the  peculiarities  of  the  Church  in  Britain 
are  an  argument  against  its  deriving  its  origin  from 
Rome — for  that  Church  differed  from  the  Romish  in 
many  respects  ;  it  agreed  far  more  with  the  Churches 
of  Asia  Minor — and  it  withstood  for  a  long  time  the 
authority  of  the  Romish  Church.  This  appears  to 
prove  that  the  British  received  either  immediately,  or 
by  means  of  Gaul,  (now   France,)  their  Christianity 


i  For  the  foregoing  account  see  Soame's  Ed.  of  Mosheim.  Vol.  ii.  pp. 
65-69,  and  Bede's  Eccl.  Hist,  from  winch  Soame's  account  is  derived. 


IV.]  THE   REFORMATION   IN   ENGLAND.  135 

from  Asia  Minor,  which  may  have  easily  taken  place 
through  their  commercial  intercourse." ' 

§  4.  With  regard  to  the  old  Province  of  The  Province 

D  Of      CjERLKON 

Cgerleon,  which  had  never  been  conquered  remained  in- 

,         .-,         <-*  .,  !_•  j  i  j        dependent  for 

by  the  Saxons — it  continued  to  be  an  inae-  flv;,  hundred 
pendent  province  until  the  reign  of  Henry  I.  yeara    after 

A  11  cr  11  s  tint's 

(a.  d.  1100-1135.)     "  During  this  whole  pe-  arrival. 

riod,  the  Bishops  of  this  province,  eleven  in 

number,  were  all  consecrated  by  the  Suffragan  Bishops 

of  that  province,    (Cserleon,)    without   any  profession 

or  subjection   to  any  other   Church  whatever." Q 

$  5.  At  the  close  of  the  eleventh  century    TheNorman 

"William,  Duke  of  Normandy,  formed  a  de-  conquest,  and 

sign   to    place    himself    on   the    throne   of  gainst  lhe  pa_ 

England.     In  this  he  was  encouraged  by  the  pai supremacy 
°  1  even  unliI  tne 

Pope,  Alexander  II.,  who  was  probably  no  Reformation. 

less  anxious  to  gain  an  ecclesiastical  supre- 
macy over  England  than  William  was  to  gain  the 
crown.  Accordingly  they  encouraged  and  assisted 
each  other,  until,  by  steps  and  means  which  I  shall  not 
n«»w  stop  to  specify,  the  Church  of  England  was 
reduced  to  B  pretty  complete  subjugation  to  the  Papal 
Supremacy. 

Prom  the  period  of  the  Norman  conquest,  however, 
down  to  lhe  Urforimition,  there  were  not  wanting 
strong  and  positive  protests  against  the  Romish  usurpa- 
tion ami  encroachments. 

In  L237,  Matthew  I'.mus,  a  Benedictine  monk,  of 

'  EDst  Christ  Religion  and  Church,  roL  I.  p.  7'.»  mid  ko,  u..-i  "»  Transit 

tion. 

•  11  immord  «»n  8eki»m,  cap  VT  ?  -i.  rad  Spdmtm't  Oomnl  Anglic 
p.  M)  cited  in  I luuuiK.iuls  Minor  Theolog.  Works,  p.  266. 


136  THE   CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  Chap. 

St.  Albans,  thus  announces  the  condition  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church.  "  Therefore  a  man  might  see  sorrow  of 
heart  water  the  eyelids  of  holy  men.  Complaints  broke 
out  and  groans  multiplied,  many  crying  with  bloody 
sighs,  it  is  better  for  us  to  die  than  to  see  the  misery 
of  our  nation,  and  of  holy  persons.  Woe  be  to  England 
which  once  was  the  Princess  of  Provinces,  the  mis- 
tress of  nations,  the  mirror  of  the  Church,  a  pattern 
of  religion,  but  now  it  is  become  tributary."  1 

About  the  same  time  Grreathead,  Bishop  of  Lincoln, 
obtained  the  name  of  "  Romanorum  Malleus,"  "  the 
hammer  of  the  Romans,"  for  his  opposition  to  the  Papal 
encroachments.  He  called  the  Pope  "  Anti-christ," 
and  "  murderer  of  souls,"  and  styles  the  condition  of 
the  English  Church  in  relation  to  Rome  an  "  Egyptian 
bondage." 2 

In  1257  the  Pope  pretended  to  excommunicate 
Sewalus,  Archbishop  of  York.  "  But,"  says  the  his- 
torian, "  he  did  not  care  to  submit  womanishly  to  the 
Pope's  will,  leaving  the  proper  strictness  of  the  law; 
wherefore  the  more  he  was  accursed  by  the  Pope's  com- 
mand the  more  was  he  blessed  of  the  people,  though  it 
was  but  secretly  for  fear  of  the  Romans." 3 

As  early  as  1236,  we  find  the  famous  "  Statute  of 
Merton"  asserting  as  a  fact  universally  acknowledged, 
that  the  canons  and  decrees  of  Rome  were  of  no  force 
in  England. 

The  famous  "  Statute  of  Carlisle"  made  in  35, 
Ed.  1,  that  is,  about  a.  d.  1305,  declares  "  that  the 

1  Bramhall  Just  Vindicatioa     Works  vol.  I.  p.  182. 
a  Bramhall,  Vol.  I  p.  185.  3  Vol.  i.  p.  183. 


IV.]  THE    REFORMATION  IN   ENGLAND.  137 

Holy  Church  of  England  was  founded  in  the  estate  of 
Prelacy,  within  the  realm  of  England,  and  that  the  en- 
croachments of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  tended  to  the  an- 
nullation  of  the  state  of  the  Church."1 

A  similar  declaration  was  made  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  II.  1307—1327.  "  The  Articles  of  the  Cler- 
gy," as  they  were  called,  passed  in  the  9th  Parlia- 
ment of  this  reign,  declare  "  that  elections  of  the 
Bishops  shall  be  free  to  the  clergy,  without  papal  inter- 
ference or  nomination, — the  king's  assent  alone  being 
obtained."2 

"The  Constitutions  of  Clarendon,"  a.  d.  1164, 
declare  that  "  if  any  man  be  found  bringing  in  the 
Pope's  letter  or  mandate,  let  him  be  apprehended  and 
let  justice  pass  upon  him  without  delay,  as  a  traitor  to 
the  king  and  kingdom ;  "  and  that  "  every  man  is  in- 
terdicted to  appeal  to  the  Pope."3 

The  same  point  was  re-enacted  in  the  various  laws 
of  " Provisions91  and  of  " Pfwmunire n  from  that 
time  down  to  the  Reformation.  One,  in  Ed.  III.  25, 
a.  n.  1360,  declares  that  "the  king  ought,  and  is  bound 
by  his  oath,  with  the  accord  of  his  people  and  parlia- 
ment to  make  remedy  and  law  for  the  removal  of  such 
mischiefs."  About  thirty  years  after,  the  Statute  L6 
Richard  [I.  declared  that  "the  Crown  of  England  was 
immediately  subjected  to  (rod  in  all  things  and  ought 
nut  to  be  submitted  to  the  Pope, "  and  thai  "they  who 
shall  procure  <>r  prosecute  any  Pope's  Bulls  and  ex- 
communications shall  incur  the  forfeiture  of  their 
bates  or  be  banished."     Henry  VI.,  king  from  1  122- 

>  Vol.  I.  p.  145.  ■p.Hd.  "p.lS6L 


138  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

1461,  declares  "  that  the  English  would  not  admit  the 
legate  of  the  Pope,  Martin  V.,  to  England  contrary  to 
the  laws  and  liberties  of  the  realm." '  And  in  1420, 
when  the  Pope  had  undertaken  to  translate  the  Bishop 
of  Lincoln  to  York,  the  Dean  and  Chapter  refused  to 
promote  it,  and  appealed  to  the  laws  of  the  land  pro- 
tecting them  against  papal  interference,  and  were  sus- 
tained, so  that  the  Pope  was  obliged  to  give  up  the 
point.2 

In  the  first  half  of  the  sixteenth  century,  Henry 
VIII.,  King  of  England,  having  married  the  widow  of 
his  deceased  brother,  began  to  entertain  doubts  of  the 
lawfulness  of  the  marriage,  and  appealed  to  the  Pope, 
notwithstanding  these  laws  against  such  a  step.  The 
Pope  did  not  readily  decide  in  the  affirmative,  for  fear 
of  displeasing  Charles  V.  of  Spain,  nor  in  the  negative, 
lest  he  offend  Henry.  This  occasioned  a  vexatious 
delay.  At  length,  Henry,  by  the  advice  of  some  of 
the  wisest  divines  in  his  country,  determined  to  revive 
the  old  freedom  from  Romish  authority,  and  declare 
the  independence  of  the  English  Church,  and  decide 
his  own  question  in  his  own  realm. 

The  rejec-       §  6.  In  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  all  those 

tion  of  the  Pa-     ,  ,     ,  •        i  i  c 

pai  sup  rem-  old  laws  were  revived  and  put  in  iorce. 
acy.  They  were  declared  to  be  no  new  laws,  but 

only  -the  old  laws  of  the  realm  revived.  This  was  the 
Reformation  in  its  political  aspect. 

Corruptions  in  doctrine,  and  abuses  of  jurisdiction 
of  the  most  gross  character,  had  also  long  been  calling 
for  reformation.     But  these  evils  seemed  to  be  insepar- 

iVoLLp.  148.  2  p.  141, 


IV.]  THE    REFORMATION  IN   ENGLAND.  139 

ably  connected  with  the  Supremacy  of  the  Pope,  and 
he  steadfastly  opposed  any  adequate  measures  for  re- 
form. Accordingly  it  began  to  be  discussed  in  the 
Universities,  and  by  the  learned  men  of  the  kingdom 
generally — whether  the  Bishop  of  Rome  had  any 
right  to  that  supremacy  which  he  had  so  long  claimed 
over  England. 

In  March  of  1534,  the  question  being  put  by  Arch- 
bishop Cranmer,  both  Houses  [of  Convocation,]  came 
to  a  resolution  against  the  Pope's  supremacy.  In  the 
lower  house  four  only  voted  for  the  Pope's  supremacy, 
and  one  demurred.  In  June,  Archibshop  Lee,  of  York, 
sent  the  king  a  sort  of  an  address  from  the  Convocation 
of  his  province,  in  which  they  renounce  the  Pope's 
authority  and  expressly  declare  that  "  by  the  Word  of 
God  he  has  no  more  jurisdiction  in  England  than  any 
other  Bishop."  The  same  protestations  were  made  by 
the  Bishops  of  Lichfield  and  Coventry,  St.  Davids  and 
Bath  and  Wells,  by  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  Bath  and 
Wells,  by  the  Trior  and  Chapter  of  St.  Davids,  by 
the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  St.  Paul's,  St.  Asaph,  Lin- 
ooln,  and  of  Landaff,  together  with  thirty-four  Abbots 
of  the  most  considerable  monasteries.1 

This  Bhows  clearly  enough  how  tired  the  English 
were  of  their  papal  bondage;  and  that  the  rejection  of 
the  I'm  pal  Supremacy  was  not  made  in  haste  and  in- 
considerately, <»r  without  oompetenl  authority. 

It  surely  cannot  he  necessary  to  say  anything 
more  than  has  been  already  said  to  show  thai  this  step 
was  justifiable.     The  Scriptures  gave  tie'   Bishop  of 

1  Collier  Feci.  Hist,  of  Great  Britain,  Vol.  IV.  p.  266. 


140  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Rome  no  authority  over  the  English  Church.  For  the 
first  five  centuries  he  neither  had  nor  claimed  such  au- 
thority. The  extension  of  his  jurisdiction  was  pro- 
hibited by  the  most  positive  laws  of  the  Church.  He 
did  but  little  in  fact  towards  the  conversion  of  the 
Saxons,  and  his  encroachments  upon  England  were 
protested  against  and  resisted  more  or  less  until  the 
Reformation,  and  they  were  always  in  violation  of  the 
laws  of  the  realm  and  the  canons  of  the  Church. 

§  7.  Thus  the  Church  of  England  was 
of  the  church  declared  free  and  independent ;  and  proceed- 
of  England  e(j  ^Q  a  reformation  of  errors  and  abuses  in 

not  affected  by 

the  rejection  doctrine  and  in  morals.  But  no  changes 
^!!,r,a™  aI  were  made  in  the  Constitution  and  orgatiiza- 
tion  of  the  Church,  except  merely  the  re- 
moval of  the  Papal  authority,  and  the  abuses  depen- 
dent upon  it.  No  clergymen  of  any  order  were  re- 
moved from  office — no  new  ones  appointed  in  their 
p]aces — no  new  congregations  gathered — no  new 
Churches  built  in  place  of  the  old.  It  was  in  all  res- 
pects the  old  Church  going  on  in  a  regular  and  orderly 
way,  doing  her  work  of  preaching  the  Gospel,  admin- 
istering the  Sacraments,  and  edifying  the  body  of 
Christ,  as  before,  with  the  exception  of  the  Papal  Su- 
premacy. 

This  rejection  of  the  Papal  Supremacy  took  place 
in  1534.  There  was,  at  that  time,  and  for  centuries 
before  there  had  been,  but  one  Church  or  religious 
communion  in  England.  And  for  more  than  thirty 
years  after  this  event  there  was  only  one — and  that 
one  before  the  Reformation  as  after  it,  was  called  and 
known  as  the  Church  of  England.     About  thirty  years 


IV.]  THE    REFORMATION    IN   ENGLAND.  HI 

after  this  date,  the  Puritans  and  the  Papists  began  to 
separate  from  the  Church  and  form  themselves  into 
separate  sects. 

$  8.  We    are    not  to  suppose  that   the     The  Refor- 

1  l  mationinDoo- 

change  in  opinion  in  the  English  took  place  trines, Disci- 
all  at  once.  More  than  one  hundred  years  ^rship8" 
before,  the  celebrated  Wickliffe  had  preach- 
ed a  reformation  and  inculcated  doctrines  contrary  to 
the  prevailing  errors  of  the  times,  which  had  never  been 
eradicated  or  fully  suppressed.  On  the  contrary,  they 
had  been  gaining  ground  until  the  middle  of  the  six- 
teenth century  ;  they  were  entertained  by  the  majority 
of  the  Church,  and  a  favorable  time  had  come  for  a 
reformation  in  accordance  with  them.  The  friends  of 
the  Reformation  had,  however,  always  remained  in 
the  Church  except  when  the  Church  itself  excommu- 
nicated them,  and  then  they  formed  themselves  into  no 
rival  or  opposing  communion.  At  the  Reformation 
there  \v;is  a  minority  opposed  to  it.  Among  them 
occur  tlic,  distinguished  names  of  Fisher  of  Rochester, 
and  Sir  Thomas  Mori:,  men  of  unquestionable  learning, 
integrity  and  piety — as  well  as  Wohey,  Gardiner  and 
BotmeTj  of  whom  a  different  character  must  be  given. 
And  even  for  thirty  years  and  more  after  the  Reforma- 
tion, we  find  many  persona  opposing  its  principles,  and 
yet  they  did  n<>t  separate  from  tin;  English  Church  or 
form  themselves  into  a  new  oommvuiion. 

$9.  As  I  have  said,  no  ohange  was  made    b«*otmii« 
in  tin-  mode  of  Church  government,  exoepl  A',. 

^ i 1 1 1 j >  1  \     the    abolition    of    the     Papacy.       Iii 

doctrines  the  Bnglish  Church  retained  tor  their  Etnle 

of  Faith,  the  Apostle's  Creed,  (which  had,  in  fact,  been 


142  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

the  only  one  that  they  had  ever  acknowledged  to  hold 
that  place,)  though  they  drew  up  certain  "Articles 
agreed  upon  by  the  Archbishops  and  Bishops  of  both 
Provinces  and  the  whole  Clergy ;  for  the  avoiding  of 
diversities  of  opinions,  and  for  the  establishing  con- 
sent touching  true  Religion,"  commonly  called  the 
XXXIX  Articles.  But  these  were  never  declared  arti- 
cles of  the  Faith,  or  necessary  to  salvation.  Nor 
were  they  ever  imposed  upon  the  laity  at  all,  as  a 
condition  of  communion.  They  were  only  an  agree- 
ment among  the  clergy  on  certain  points  then  chiefly 
in  controversy. 

For  their  Liturgy,  they  revised  the  Books  then 
generally  in  use,  purging  them  from  the  errors  and 
superstitions  that  had  crept  into  them.  In  all  this  the 
one  rule  that  they  strictly  adhered  to,  was  to  restore  all 
things  to  a  conformity,  as  near  as  possible  to  the  au- 
thentic documents  of  the  first  centuries. 

They  also  translated  the  Scriptures,  and  'used  them 
in  the  Churches  in  the  English  language,  and  made 
provisions  for  putting  a  copy  into  every  family  and  into 
the  hands  of  every  individual  that  could  read  them. 

In  all  these  steps  the  Church  herself  took  the  lead 
and  did  the  work.  Sometimes  a  Formulary  or  Docu- 
ment was  drawn  by  persons  appointed  for  that  purpose 
by  the  Church,  and  then  adopted.  At  others,  the 
Formulary  was  first  drawn  up,  and  subsequently 
adopted.  But  it  was  always  duly  adopted  by  the 
representative  body  of  the  Church  before  it  came  into 
use,  or  was  considered  to  be  duly  in  force. 

§  10.  But  the  main  point  for  our  present  purposes 
is  the   fact  that  this  Reformation  constituted  no  new 


IV.]  THE    REFORMATION   IN   ENGLAND.  143 

Church.     The  Church  of  England  reformed    The  church 
itself.      There  was  but   one   religious  de- f Englandnot 

*  °  formed     or 

nomination  in  England  before  1534.  There  founded  anew 
was  but  one  for  more  than  thirty  years  after-  nation  Ref°r" 
ward  :  and  that  one  was  the  same  identical 
body  through  the  whole  interval.  There  was  no 
change  in  its  name  or  form  of  organization,  no  turning 
out  old  clergy  and  appointing  new,  no  gathering  new 
congregations  from  the  old,  no  separation  of  the  clergy 
from  the  laity,  but  a  quiet,  orderly,  and  harmonious 
progress  in  the  work  of  Reformation. 

In  1569,  the  advocates  of  the  old  papal  abuses, 
having  lost  all  hope  of  gaining  the  ascendancy  in  the 
Church  of  England  again,  left  it  and  organized  a 
Papal  sect,  which,  however,  was  very  small  in  point 
of  numbers.  Subsequently,  the  partisans  of  the  pecu- 
liarities of  the  Calvinistic  theory,  despairing  of  gaining 
the  ascendancy  in  the  Church,  withdrew  also  and 
formed  another  sect.  But  still  the  Church  included 
the  vast  majority  of  the  people  of  England.  No  one 
of  these  sects  of  seceders  claimed  to  be  the  Church 
which  had  existed  in  England  for  centuries.  Such  a 
olaim  was  too  obviously  absurd,  and  contrary  to  all 
facts,  and  all  principles  of  identity  to  be  thought  of, 
even  by  those  whose  interests  were  the  most  concerned 
in  niiiking  it. 

Hence  there  was  no  new  communion  formed,  no 
new  Rule  of  Faith  adopted,  no  new  terms  of  com- 
munion proposed,  no  new  name  assumed,  no  new 
standard  set  up,  nothing  new  except  a  new  return  to 
old  tint  lis,  a  renewed  inculcation  of  the  Faith  once 
delivered  to  the  Saints. 


144  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

It  is  desirable  to  show,  not  only  that  the  Reforma- 
tion did  not  establish  "  the  Church  of  England  "  as  a 
new  sect,  but  also  that  it  was  not  so  regarded  by  the 
enemies  of  the  Reformation  themselves. 

This  appears  from  several  facts,  no  less  clearly 
than  from  declarations  in  express  words. 

After  the  accession  of  Mary,  1553,  when  she  de- 
termined to  restore  Popery  in  England,  the  principal 
changes  required,  were  that  the  Bishops  and  Clergy 
should  conform  to  the  Romish  Faith  and  Obedience. 
If  they  would  have  done  that,  they  need  not  have  been 
molested  or  disturbed.  So  likewise  in  the  early  years 
of  Elizabeth's  reign.  While  the  Pope  was  endeavoring 
to  regain  the  ascendancy  which  he  lost  when  she  came 
to  the  throne,  he  did  not  declare  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land a  mere  new  sect  that  had  sprung  up,  but  he  was 
willing  to  receive  it  collectively  as  a  Church — acknow- 
ledging the  validity  of  its  ordinations,  if  it  would 
acknowledge  his  supremacy  and  conform  in  some  few 
particulars  to  his  will. 

But  most  of  all ;  after  he  had  succeeded  in  getting 
a  sect  of  seceders  from  the  Church  to  profess  their  ad- 
herence to  him,  he  did  not  even  then  call  his  followers 
in  England  "  the  Church  of  England."  And  though 
he  sent  Bishops  there,  he  did  not  call  them  Bishops  of 
London,  of  Durham,  of  Winchester,  &c,  &c,  after  the 
Sees  from  which  the  Bishops  in  the  English  Church 
for  centuries  had  taken  their  titles,  and  from  which 
they  take  them  to  this  day  ;  but  he  gave  them  a  ficti- 
tious title,  derived  from  no  place  whatever,  as  Bishop 
of  Melipotamus  [Honey-river,]  &c,  &c. 

Now  from  these  facts  it  is  perfectly  certain,  that 


IV.]  THE    REFORMATION    IN    ENGLAND.  145 

the  Church  of  Rome  did  not  regard  its  adherents  in 
England  as  the  Church  of  England,  and  that  it  did 
so  regard  the  Church  which  had  thrown  off  the  Papal 
yoke. 

It  appears  thus  from  the  admissions  of  her  enemies, 
no  less  than  from  her  own  claims  and  from  the  indis- 
putable and  insuperable  facts  in  the  case,  that  the 
Church  of  England  did  not  originate  at  the  time  of 
the  Reformation,  or  lose  her  identity  by  the  change ; 
and  by  rejecting  the  Papal  Supremacy,  she  only  gained 
the  independence  to  which,  by  the  Scriptures  and  the 
ancient  laws  of  the  Church,  she  was  most  fully  and 
most  indefeasibly  entitled. 

♦  11.  Since  the  Reformation  in  England,    The  church 

0  of  England  in 

the  Church  of  England  has  been  in  com- communion 
munion  with  the  Eastern  Churches.  They  ^f  J^S 
have  mutually  recognized  each  other  to  be  since  the  k«- 
tiruc  branches  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  ac- 
knowledging  the  validity  of  each  other's  ordinations, 
oonoeding  to  each  other  the  communion  due  from 
one  branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ  to  another. 

k  12.  Although  we  may  say  that  the  The  church 
Original  Church  is  divided  at  present  into  ™*o  jjjjj 
three  Communions,  the  Eastern,  the  Roman,  o«od  uivi- 
aiiil  the  Reformed — including,  in  the  latter, 
all  the  Churches  which  she  has  established  since  her 
reformation,  yel  in  fad  they  are  but  two — the  Roman, 
on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Eastern  ;m<l  the  Reformed, 
[being  in  communion  with  each  other,]  constituting 
tin-  other. 

♦  L8.  Id  speaking  of  the  Reformation  in  JJJ^JJ 
England,  I   do  not  intend  to  prejudice  the 

7 


iiii- 

llruiiclH'.*. 


146  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

character  of  any  of  the  other  reformations.  I  select 
England  as  the  point  of  discussion  for  several  reasons, 
1.  Because  the  Church  in  that  country  is  older  than 
that  in  any  of  the  others  where  a  Reformation  has 
been  effected.  2.  Because  that  Church  was  so  un- 
questionably independent  for  several  centuries  after 
its  first  planting.  3.  Because  the  Reformation  was 
there  beyond  the  possibility  of  a  denial — a  reformation 
in  a  branch  of  the  Church,  and  not  the  origination  of 
a  new  church  or  sect ;  and  finally.  4.  Because  the 
Church  of  England  has  done  more  than  all  the  other 
reformed  Churches  put  together,  in  extending  the 
Church,  by  establishing  new  and  affiliated  branches. 

In  what  I  shall  have  to  say  in  the  present  chapter, 
I  shall  include  with  the  Church  of  England,  as  a  class 
of  which  that  is  a  type  and  representative,  all  other 
Churches  which  have  been  founded  by  the  Church  of 
England,  or  which  are  in  communion  with  her. 

§  14.  The  early  divisions  in  the  Church 

The    early  ... 

divisions  local  were  local ;  each  division  being  called,  also, 
and  not  de-     q^j^  anc[  taking  its  name  from  the  place 

nominational.  70  1 

where  it  was  situated.  The  only  denomina- 
tional difference  known  to  the  Scriptures  or  allowed  in 
the  Church,  were  derived  from  the  place  in  which 
each  Church  was  located.  It  was  not  a  Presbyterian 
church,  a  Methodist  church,  a  Congregational  church, 
&c. ;  but  it  was  the  Church  at  Ephesus,  the  Church 
of  Rome,  the  Church  of  England,  &c,  &c. 

k  15.  We  have  seen  how  these  Churches 
eions  between  were  associated  for  provincial  and  still  more 
the  west  and  general  purposes.     As  early  as  the  middle  of 

the  fifth  century,  Leo  the  Great,  Bishop  of 


IV]  THE    REFORMATION   IN    ENGLAND.  147 

Rome,  had  formed  the  design  of  an  universal  supre- 
macy in  the  Church,  for  himself  and  his  successors  in 
the  same  See.  And  yet,  more  than  a  century  after 
this,  Gregory,  also  called  the  Great,  Bishop  of  Rome, 
vehemently  denounced  the  idea  of  any  such  supremacy. 
In  his  letter  to  Mauritius  the  Emperor,  he  says :  "I 
am  bold  to  say  that  whosoever  uses  or  affects  the  style 
of  universal  Bishop  [as  the  Archbishop  of  Constanti- 
nople had  done,]  has  the  pride  and  character  of 
Anti-Christ,  and  is  in  some  measure  his  harbinger  in 
this  haughty  quality  of  mounting  himself  above  the 
rest  of  his  order."  Writing  to  Anastasitis,  Bishop  of 
Antioch,  he  says  still  further  :  "this  is  a  point  of  the 
last  importance,  neither  can  we  comply  with  the  innova- 
tion without  betraying  Religion,  and  adulterating  the 
Catholic  Faith?"  Thus  we  see  that  in  the  sixth 
century,  a  Bishop  of  Rome  could  condemn  as  a  char- 
acteristic of  Anti-Christ,  that  for  not  believing  in 
which  a  Bishop  of  the  same  See,  in  more  modern  cen- 
turies must  declare  persona  out  of  communion  with 
the  Church,  and  cut  off  from  its  Invisible  Head. 

Jealousies  had  for  a  longtime  subsisted  between 
the  Bast  and  the  West,  before  a  final  separation  took 
place. 

In  a.  d.  1053,  Mkhael  Cerularius,  Patriarch 
of Constantinople,  sent  a  letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Tram', 

intended  for  the  Bishop  of  luwir,  complaining,  as  he 
had  a  right  to  do,  of  Some  of  the  rites  and  eustmus 
which  the    Bishop  of   Home  was  eneouraging  in   the 

Western  Churches.  Leo  1\.  (for  that  was  the  dame 
of  the  Bishop  of  Rome)  complained  of  the  interference 

of  the    Constantinople    Bishop.      In    the   next  year  he 


148  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

sent  three  Legates  to  Constantinople.  Among  these 
Legates  was  Cardinal  Humbert,  which  was  evidently 
an  unfortunate  selection.  His  language  to  Cerularius 
was  arrogant  and  discourteous,  and  he  closed  by 
threatening  him  with  excommunication,  &c,  if  he 
did  not  reject,  what  Humbert  was  pleased  to  call  his 
errors,  and  conform  to  the  Romish  usages.  The  Bish- 
op of  Constantinople  would  not  yield,  and  before  the 
Legates  left  the  city,  they  placed  on  the  Altar  of  St. 
Sophia's,  a  formal  excommunication  of  Cerularius  and 
his  adherents.  This  was  a  most  direct  assumption  of 
authority  over  Cerularius  and  the  Eastern  Church,  of 
which  he  was  the  acknowledged  head.  It  led  to  the 
division  of  the  East  and  the  West,  which  exists  to  the 
present  day. 

The        k  16.  At   the   Reformation,    as  we  have 
division  iii  seen,  another  division  was  occasioned.     The 

t  fci  t*'   Western 

church  effect-  contest  then,  also,  was  with  the  Romish 
ed  by  the  Re-  ciann  to  Supremacy.     Yet  not  directlv  :  for 

formation.  " 

the  Church  of  England  probably  would  not 
have  rejected  that  Supremacy  if  it  had  been  kept 
within  the  bounds  of  the  early  canons,  and  had  not  in- 
dissoiubly  allied  itself  to  some  of  the  worst  corruptions 
in  morals,  as  well  as  doctrines,  that  were  to  be  found 
in  that  age.  As  England  had  the  right  to  be  free  from 
Rome,  and  could  not  reform  herself  without,  she  exer- 
cised that  right,  and  was  anathematised  by  Rome 
for  it. 

This,  of  course,  led  to  another  division  and  alien- 
ation among  Churches  which  are  unquestionably 
Apostolic,  and  whose  catholicity  up  to  that  day  had 
never  been  called  in  question.     We  have  not  yet  pro- 


IV.]  THE    REFORMATION    IN    ENGLAND.  149 

ceeded  far  enough  in  our  work  of  historic  identifica- 
tion to  say  with  any  definiteness  how  large  a  portion 
of  the  Churches,  in  the  Roman  Obedience,  became 
separated  from  it  by  the  Reformation.  In  England, 
Ireland,  Scotland,  Norway,  Sweden  and  Denmark,  the 
Church  of  Rome  made  no  pretensions  of  retaining  the 
jurisdiction.  She  made  no  show  even  of  setting  up 
her  claims  for  the  individuals  that  still  cherished  a 
preference  for  her  doctrines  and  usages  that  they 
should  be  considered  as  the  old  Church  in  those  coun- 
tries, still  in  existence,  though  diminished  in  numbers. 
By  her  own  confession,  then,  she  lost  the  Churches  in 
these  several  nations,  from  her  obedience. 

$  17.  Now,  it  cannot  for  a  moment  be      Nether  of 

these  D  i  v  i  a- 

pretcnded,  with  any  show  of  reason,  that  any  i0„9  0f  the 
one  of  these  parts  of  the  Church  lost  its  right,  Church  be" 

1  D      '  came  apostate 

or  its  power,  to  spread  the  Gospel,  in  conse-  in  conse- 
quence of  this  alienation.     If  the  Papal  Su-  £■"  of  the 

*■  r  Reparation. 

premacy  were  an  essential  element  of  the 
Church,  then,  of  course,  rejection  of  that  supremacy — 
or  rejection  by  it — would  disable  any  Church  from 
carrying  on  missionary  operations.  It  might,  indeed, 
preaoh  and  build,  but  it  would  be  buildingon  "  anoth- 
er foundation,"  and  what  it  built  would  not  be  the 
Church  of  Christ. 

Or  again:  if  any  one  of  these;  three  parts,  into 
which  the  <  Original  and  Primitive  Church  is  divided,  lias 
set  forth  another  Rule  <>\'  Paith  different  from  and  in- 
consistent with  that  of  the  Primitive  Church,  so  as  that 
in  her  missionary  operations  she  is  inculcating  ■  Gos- 
pel different  in  its  essential  features  from  thai  preach- 
ed by  the  immediate  KvangeliMs  and  Apostles   of  our 


150  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Lord,  this  fact  may  incapacitate  them  from  effectual 
missionary  labors. 

The  Eng-  .  $  18.  I  will  not  here  stop  to  inquire  how 
only  returned  ^ar  R°me  nas  laid  a  new  foundation.  But 
to  the  Primi-  mGst  assuredly  the  Church  of  England  has 
Faith  and  not  done  it.  Her  Rule  of  Faith  is  the  Apos- 
Practice.  ^q>s  Creed — the  most  simple — the  most 
primitive,  and  the  one  that  was  and  is  now  univer- 
sally received.  This  she  proposes  as  her  Baptismal  con- 
fession of  Faith.  This  is  what  she  requires  all  of  her 
members  to  be  taught  in  her  Catechism,  and  to  renew 
their  profession  and  confession  of,  in  Confirmation, 
and  this  it  is  which  she  proposes  to  her  members  when 
about  to  leave  the  world  as  the  Faith  in  which  they 
are  to  be  received  by  their  Final  Judge. 

Nor  does  she  put  upon  this  Creed  any  new  or  pe- 
culiar construction  of  her  own.  Her  solemn  declara- 
tion is  that  her 

"  Preachers  shall  take  heed  that  they  teach  noth- 
ing in  their  preaching,  which  they  would  have  the 
people  religiously  observe  and  believe,  but  that  which 
is  agreeable  to  the  teaching  of  the  Old  Testament  and 
the  New,  and  that  which  the  Catholic  Fathers  and  the 
Ancient  Bishops  have  gathered  out  of  that  very  teach- 
ing."' 

Again : 

"  Nay,  so  far  was  it  from  the  purpose  of  the  Church 
of  England  to  forsake  and  reject  the  Churches  of  Italy, 
France,  Spain,  Germany,  or  any  such  like  Churches, 
in  all  things  which  they  held  and  practised,  that  as  the 

1  Cardwell's  Synodalia,  VoL  L  p.  126. 


IV.]  THE    REFORMATION   IN    ENGLAND.  151 

Apology  of  the  Church  of  England  confesseth,  it  doth 
with  reverence  retain  those  ceremonies  [even]  which  do 
neither  endamage  the  Church  of  God,  nor  offend  the 
minds  of  sober  men  ;  and  only  departed  from  them  in 
those  particular  points  wherein  they  were  fallen  both 
from  themselves  in  their  ancient  integrity  and  from 
the  Apostolical  Churches,  which  were  their  first 
founders."1 

$  19.  It  has  sometimes  been  said,  that  The  Romish 
since  the  English  Church  and  Bishops  de-  J"l0"™u^ 
rived  whatever  authority  they  had  from  the  force  against 
Pope  and  Church  of  Rome,  therefore,  now  church, 
that  the  Church  of  Rome  has  withdrawn 
that  authority  they  are  none  the  better  for  this  con- 
nection with  the  past. 

This  objection  presents  three  distinct  points, 
which  we  will  consider  in  order. 

1.  Nothing  occurred  which  can  be  regarded  as  de- 
priving the  English  Church  and  Clergy  of  their  au- 
thority and  mission  until  the  Bull  of  Pius  V.,  dated 
IVh.  23,  L569.  This  Bull  declares  "that  those  who 
adhere  to  Queen  Elizabeth  in  the  practices  aforesaid" 
— the  Reformation — "  lie  under  the  censure  of  anathe- 
ma, and  are  cutoff  from  the  unity  of  the  body  of  Christ." 
Bat  the  Pope  had  no  authority  at  that  time,  either  in 
fact  or  by  right  over  Elizabeth  or  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, ami  therefore,  his  excommunication  was  of  no 
force,  against  them.     The  Pope  had   no  more  right  or 

authority  to  exoommunioate  them  than  any  private 
individual  whatever.      This    answer  eanimi    be  denied 

1  Canon  xxx  of  1003. 


152  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

without  maintaining  the  divine  right  of  the  Pope  to 
Supremacy  over  the  Whole  Church. 

2.  But,  again,  from  the  abolition  of  the  Papal  Su- 
premacy in  1534,  until  the  accession  of  Mary,  in  1553, 
a  period  of  nineteen  years,  Bishops  were  selected  and 
ordained  without  obtaining  any  authority  or  permis- 
sion from  the  Pope — and  without  even  consulting  him 
at  all.  After  the  accession  of  Elizabeth,  1558,  the 
Papal  Supremacy  was  again  abolished,  and  from  that 
time  until  the  Bull  of  1569,  Bishops  had  also  been 
ordained  without  consulting  him  at  all.  None  of  the 
Bishops  who  had  been  consecrated  before  1534, — the 
first  rejection  of  the  Papal  Supremacy — lived  to  hold 
their  offices  after  the  accession  of  Elizabeth.  And 
none  of  those  that  had  been  consecrated  during  Mary's 
reign,  while  the  Papal  Supremacy  was  acknowledged, 
consented  to  retain  their  offices  under  Elizabeth.  All 
the  Bishops  in  the  actual  possession  of  Sees  in  England 
during  Elizabeth's  reign,  and  when  the  Bull  was 
issued  in  1569,  had  been  ordained,  therefore,  either 
between  1534,  and  the  accession  of  Mary,  or  during 
the  reign  of  Q,ueen  Elizabeth  herself.  Hence  it  so 
happens  that  when  the  Bull  of  excommunication  was 
issued,  there  was  not  a  single  Bishop  in  the  English 
Church  who  had  been  ordained  under  the  Pope's 
Supremacy,  or  had  in  any  way  promised  obedience  to 
him,  or  derived  even  a  show  of  authority  from  him  in 
any  shape  or  form  whatever.1 

1  Anthony  Kitchen,  Bishop  of  Llandaff,  was  the  only  Bishop  who 
did  hold  a  See  during  Mary's  reign,  and  conformed  to  the  Papacy,  that 
consented  to  retain  his  See  under  Elizabeth.  He  was  elected  March  26, 
1545,  confirmed  May  2,  and  consecrated  the  day  after.    Of  course,  there- 


IV.]  THE    REFORMATION    IN    ENGLAND.  153 

If,  then,  it  were  true  that  the  English  Bishops  be- 
fore the  Reformation  derived  their  authority  from  the 
Pope,  yet  there  is  not  the  slightest  shadow  of  a  pre- 
tence that  those  whom  he  undertook  to  excommuni- 
cate in  Elizabeth's  reign,  had  derived  any  authority 
from  him.  And  the  Pope  had  never  excommunicated 
or  deprived  those  who  had  been  ordained  under  him — 
who  had  concurred  in  the  rejection  of  his  Supremacy, 
and  from  whom,  after  its  rejection,  the  Bishops  of 
Elizabeth's  reign  had  derived  their  orders. 

This  Bull  was  of  no  force,  therefore,  against  the 
Bishops  at  whom  it  was  aimed,  on  the  ground  that 
the  Pope  could  take  away  what  he  had  given. 

3.  But  even  before  the  Reformation,  the  English 
Bishops  were  not  regarded  as  obtaining  their  authority 
to  minister  in  sacred  things  from  the  Pope.  Ifeis  true, 
that  he  had  claimed  the  right  of  "Investiture,"  as  it 
was  called.  And  this  right,  though  in  violation  of  the 
laws  of  the  land,  which  were  revived  under  Henry 
VIII. ,  was  conceded,  though  with  a  good  deal  of  op- 
poeition  and  protestation.  The  election  of  Bishops 
was   a>   follows:  The  King  granted    to  the  Chapter, 

fore,  the  Pope  had  nothing  todo  with  the  matter.  Under  Mary,  1558-1668, 
be  conformed  to  the  Papacy,  but  on  the  accession  of  Elisabeth,  be  took  the 
oath  ami  retained  his  Bee.  He  died  on  :;ist  of  Oct.,  L568,  more  than  five 
rears  before  the  pretended  Bzcominumcation  and  Deprivation.  (Godwin 
1),-  Pratvlibu*  Anglia)  And  it  should  also  be  remarked,  that  but  a 
short  time  before  the  Hull  of  1 569,  the  Pope  himself  had  acknowledged 

the   Knglish    Ihshnps   to   p. >--.■--   Kpi-copal   character  and   authority,  by 

connontang  to  allow  them  to  retain  then-  Bees,  and  oonoeding  some  other 
points  to  them  if  they  would  acknowledge  his  Supremacy.     It  app< 
therefore,  from  his  confessions,  thai  even  in  hi<  own  estimation,  the]  pot- 

ses-cd   the   authority  of  their  office,though  thev  had  not  derived  U  from 

him. 

7* 


154  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

that  is,  the  Cathedral  clergy,  of  the  vacant  Diocese  a 
conge  cPelire  [permission  to  elect.]  They  chose  the 
man  whom  they  desired  for  Bishop.  The  Bishop  elect 
musj;  then  have  the  royal  assent  and  be  confirmed, 
that  is,  approved  of,  as  Bishop  elect  by  the  Pope  or  his 
Legate.  After  which  he  was  ordained  by  the  Bishops 
whom  the  Pope  named  for  that  purpose.  These  Bish- 
ops, however,  were  English  Bishops,  who  were#  resid- 
ing in  England,  and  actually  in  the  exercise  of  the 
duties  of  their  office.  The  Pope  also,  or  his  Legate, 
put  upon  the  newly  consecrated  Bishop  the  pall  and 
other  insignia  of  his  authority — which  was  called  the 
"Investiture."1  But  his  election  and  ordination  gave 
the  Bishop  his  authority  as  Bishop  in  the  Church,  and 
his  right  to  jurisdiction  in  the  particular  Diocese.  Nei- 
ther of  them  was  held  to  be  derived  from  the  Pope.. 

There  is  therefore  no  sense  in  which  the  English 
Church  or  her  Bishops  had  derived  their  authority 
from  the  Pope  or  Church  of  Rome,  consequently  no 
sense  in  which  it  could  be  taken  away  by  Romish 
authorities. 

Here  then  we  have  the  Church  of  England  unques- 
tionably a  part  of  the  identical  historic  Church  of 
Christ,  deriving  the  origin  of  its  existence  from  the 
very  Apostles  themselves,  reformed  from  the  corrup- 
tions and  errors  of  the  middle  ages,  returning  to  the 
teachings  and  standards  of  the  Primitive  Church — and 
disowned  by  Rome  for  so  doing.  If  now  this  aliena- 
tion is  the  annihilation  of  one  or  the  other  of  the  parties 
to  the  division,  as  Churches  of  Christ,  there  is  no  rea 

1  Burns'  Ecclesiastical  Law.    Vol.  L  p.  179. 


IV.]  THE   REFORMATION    IN   ENGLAND.  155 

son  why  this  consequence  should  result  to  the  Church 
of  England  rather  than  to  the  Church  of  Rome. 

$  20.  The  alienation  between  these  three  The  8epara. 
branches  of  the   Church,  the   Eastern,  the  tion  between 

,  i  li       these      Grand 

Roman,  and  the  Reformed,  is  undoubtedly  Divisions    of 
an  evil,  and  alike  the  result  and  the  proof  of the   Cnurcn 

r  unlike       a 

sin.     But  most  unquestionably  neither  the  schism  in  the 

, .    .    .  . .  i  •  .  •  •  ,i       8ame  commu- 

division   nor   the    alienation  terminates  the  ni0n. 
visible  existence  of  either  of  those  branches. 
And  I  know  of  no  reason  why   it  should  necessarily 
involve  any  one  of  them  in  apostacy  from  Christ.     If 
they  are  apostate  it  must  be  for  other  reasons. 

Such  an  alienation  between  different  branches  of 
the  Church  as  this  which  we  are  now  considering,  is  a 
very  different  thing  from  what  we  considered  in  Chapter 
II.  when  we  were  speaking  of  the  rise  of  a  new  sect 
or  second  church  in  the  plaoe  where  one  already 
existed,  so  as  to  make  two  different  churches  or  de- 
nominations in  the  same  place.  It  is  such  an  . 
alienation  that  the  Scriptures  are  speaking  of  in  all 
those  passages  from  which  we  infer  that  the  result 
would  be  a  rival  sect,  rather  than  an  affiliated  branch 
of  the  Church  itself. 

Although  an  alienation  between  the  different 
branches  of  the  Church  such  as  that  which  now  sub- 
sists between  England  and  Rome,  for  instance,  is 
undoubtedly  a  great  evil — a  contravention  of  the  prayer 
of  our  Lord  in  the  night  in  which  He  was  betrayed,1 
ami  involves  a  tremendous  responsibility  for  those  who 
are  truly  the  causes  of  it,  \<t    it  does  not  bring  in  its 

1  John  .wii.  '21. 


156  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

train  the  evils  for  which  schisms  are  chiefly  condemned 
in  the  New  Testament.  There  being  but  one  Church 
in  a  country  still,  the  members  of  the  different 
Churches  would  live  in  entirely  different  communi- 
ties— move  in  different  circles — associate  in  different 
spheres  of  action,  and  of  course  have,  but  very  rare 
occasions  to  come  into  either  contact  or  collision.  Be- 
ing united  among  themselves  in  the  Church  in  each 
particular  locality,  they  would  enjoy  by  far  the 
greatest  share  of  the  benefits  of  an  entire  unity  in  the 
whole  Church.  There  would  be  but  very  little  occa- 
sion offered  for  those  jealousies,  contentions,  rivalries, 
and  oppositions,  which  inevitably  result  from  there 
being  several  sects  in  the  same  place,  and  which  lead, 
as  they  have  led,  to  great  decay  of  religion,  and  to  the 
prevalence  ot  infidelity  and  profanity  amongst  by  far 
the  greatest  proportion  of  the  inhabitants  of  our  land. 

I  am  not  anxious  to  conceal  the  fact,  though  the 
object  we  have  now  in  view  does  not  require  any  pro- 
longed discussion  of  it — that  there  are  also  alienations 
and  misunderstandings  existing  to  some  extent  be- 
tween the  different  branches  of  the  Oriental  Church. 
And  so,  too,  there  are  controversies  and  points  of  ma- 
terial difference,  between  the  several  Churches  in  the 
Roman  Obedience,  as,  for  instance,  between  those  in 
France  and  Italy.  From  what  has  been  said,  it  will 
appear  that  the  Church,  in  any  one  or  all  of  these 
separate  or  distinct  nations,  has  a  right  to  declare 
itself  free  and  independent  of  the  control  of  any  foreign 
Bishop  or  Church  whatever,  if  it  should  choose  to 
do  so. 

Without  saying,  then,  that  there  is  a  perfect  har- 


IV.]  THE   REFORMATION   IN   ENGLAND.  157 

mony  among  all  of  the  Branches  in  each  of  the  great 
divisions  of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ — for  that 
manifestly  is  not  the  case — I  say  that  we  may  include 
all  these  Churches  in  three  distinct  classes. 

1.  The  Eastern,  including  all  those  Branches  of 
the  Church  which  have  never  submitted  to  the  Papal 
Supremacy — the  Russian,  the  Greek,  the  Syrian,  the 
Armenian,  the  Coptic,  or  Egyptian,  the  Abyssinian, 
&c. 

2.  The  Churches  that  are  yet  in  the  Roman  Obe- 
dience, as  those  of  Austria,  Italy,  France,  Spain, 
Portugal,  &c. 

3.  Those  Churches  which  were  once  subject  to  the 
Papal  Supremacy,  and  Srre  now  reformed  and  freed 
from  it,  as  England,  Ireland,  Scotland,  Norway,  Swe- 
den, Denmark,  &c,  without  naming  now  the  midland 
nations  of  Europe,  where,  as  we  shall  see  by  and  by, 
the  case  is  somewhat  different,  and  omitting  to  men- 
tion, in  this  place,  all  those  Churches  that  have  been 
established  by  any  of  the  Churches  in  this  class  since 
the  Reformation. 

In  classing  the  churches  of  Norway,  Sweden  and 
Denmark,  with  the  Church  of  England,  I  do  by  no 
means  intend  to  intimate  that  I  consider  them  as 
occupying  the  same  position  in  all  respects.  In  some 
of  those  nations,  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  Clergy  at 
the  time  of  the  Reformation  were  driven  off  or  out  of 
their  official  positions,  and  others  put  in  their  places 

in  a  manner    which    was  at    variance  with    what    has 

always  been  regarded  in  the  Church  aa  essential  to 
the  validity  of  the  ministerial  office.  This,  however, 
i>  a  point  that  we  need   no1   disouss  bere.     They  are 


158  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

at  least  Churches  that  separated  themselves  at  that 
time  from  the  Roman  Obedience ;  and  if  their  min- 
istry is  invalid  or  informal,  the  defect  can  be  remedied, 
as  was  done  with  that  in  the  Church  of  Scotland  in 
1610,  when  the  regular  succession  having  been  lost, 
three  Bishops  were  ordained  for  Scotland  in  London, 
and  they  on  their  return  ordained  others  to  supply  the 
whole  deficiency. 

The  Mini«tr  ^  ^"  ^u*  no  sucn  imperfection  or  inva- 

of  the  English  lidity  attaches  to  the  Ministry  of  the  English 
same  after  the  Church.  They  were  neither  driven  off  nor 
Reformation   rejected    at  the   Reformation,   but,   on  the 

as  before. 

contrary,  they  were  themselves  the  chief 
agents  in  carrying  it  on.  And,  in  the  ordination  of 
their  successors,  all  the  rites  that  have  ever  been 
deemed  essential  in  the  Church,  were  carefully  ob- 
served. 

The  clergy  were  foremost  in  the  rejection  of  the 
Papal  Supremacy.  They  revised  and  prepared  the 
Liturgy — they  translated  the  Scriptures — and  though 
they  were  sometimes  compelled  to  submit  to  an  exer- 
cise of  royal  authority,  which  they  considered  as  an 
infringement  of  the  liberties  of  the  Church,  yet  in  all 
the  stages  of  the  Reformation,  they  were  the  leading 
agents,  and  any  thing  that  could  affect  the  validity  of 
its  position,  was  duly  enacted  and  sanctioned  by  the 
Church  clergy  and  laity  in  their  legitimate  modes 
of  transacting  ecclesiastical  affairs. 

We  have  then,  before  our  minds,  one  of  the  oldest 
branches  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  reaching  back, 'in 
the  commencement  of  its  existence,  to  the  very  days 
of  the  Apostles,  once  subjugated   to  the  Roman  Su- 


IV.]  THE   REFORMATION   IN   ENGLAND.  159 

premacy — but  now  reformed  and  free, — in  the  full 
exercise  of  her  functions  as  a  Church  of  Christ,  and  as 
unquestionably  a  part  of  that  identical  visible  society 
which  He  and  His  Apostles  founded  as  any  other  that 
can  be  named  on  earth ;  disowned,  indeed,  by  Rome 
for  her  Protestantism,  but  for  that  very  reason  owned 
and  fellowshipped  by  Churches  older  than  Rome  her- 
self, and  which  were  in  Christ  before  the  sound  of 
the  Gospel  had  ever  been  heard  in  the  city  of  the 
seven  hills.  She  has  had,  indeed,  some  vicissitudes 
of  fortune,  but  through  them  all  she  has  been  the 
same — the  Church  of  England — the  only  body  of  per- 
sons that  ever  claimed  to  be  called  by  that  name  in 
England,  or  to  which  it  was  ever  by  any  body  for  one 
moment  supposed  to  belong. 


CHAPTER  V. 


THE    ORIGIN    OF    MODERN    SECTS,    AND    THEIR    RELATION 

TO    THE    CHURCH. 

Having  succeeded  in  identifying  a  part  of  the 
Church  which  is  free  from  the  Romish  Jurisdiction, 
and  which  has  done  much  towards  extending  its  com- 
munion in  this  western  world,  we  will  now  draw  our 
subject  within  still  narrower  limits.  Before  proceed- 
ing, however,  to  trace  the  introduction  and  extension 
of  the  English  Branch  of  the  Church  into  this  coun- 
try, and  to  identify  its  existence  here,  we  will  turn 
aside  to  consider  the  several  sects  to  be  found  here, 
which  have  come  into  existence  since  the  reformation 
commenced. 

In  considering  these  sects  we  shall  see  that  some 
of  them  were  formed  by  persons  seceding  directly 
from  either  the  Roman  or  the  Reformed  Branch  of  the 
Church  :  some  have  been  formed  by  divisions  in  those 
sects :  and  still  another  class  have  arisen  as  it  were 
de  novo,  by  some  individual  collecting  around  him  a 
number  of  persons  from  all  sects,  or  that  had  belonged 
to  no  sect.  Hence  we  may  divide  them  all  into  three 
classes,  Primary,  Secondary,  and  Autothentic. 

In  this  enumeration  I  shall  have  regard  only  to  the 


Chap.  V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  161 

sects  in  our  own  country.  I  shall  in  all  cases  take 
their  own  statements,  and  accounts  of  their  origin  ; 
and  when  I  can  conveniently  do  so,  I  shall  give  those 
statements  in  their  own  language.  My  object  will  not 
lead  me  into  any  general  account  of  their  doctrines  or 
of  their  principles  of  church-polity.  Our  attention  is 
directed  chiefly  to  their  history  as  visible  societies. 

PRIMARY  SECTS. 

Under  this  head,  I  include  some  nine  or  ten. 
The  characteristic  by  which  they  are  distinguished,  is, 
that,  with  one  or  two  exceptions,  they  resulted  from 
attempts  at  what  was,  or  was  regarded  as,  a  reforma- 
tion in  the  Church — the  reformers  however,  failing  to 
have  their  views  adopted  by  the  Church,  seceded  with 
their  adherents  and  became  a  sect.  I  shall  take  up 
the  consideration  of  them  in  alphabetic  order. 

k  1.   "The  Baptist  church  in  this  country       The  BaP" 

1  J    tists;    their 

was  founded  March,  a.  d.  1639.  'Many  of  origin  and 
the  first  settlers  in  Massachusetts  were  Bap-  Hi9to,7, 
tists,  and  a  holy  and  watchful,  and  fruitful,  and  heav- 
enly a  people,  as  perhaps  any  in  the  world,'  says 
Cotton  Matin  r.  Roger  Wilt  jams  having  escaped  the 
intolerance  of  the  Puritans  of  Massachusetts  Bay, 
came  to  what  now  is  called  Providence,  Rhode  Island, 
in  L636,  founded  a  colony,  and  became  its  governor, 
lie  wsis  ;i  Baptist,  and  'many  of  his  people  entertain- 
ed his  views.'  But  neither  he  nor  any  of  them  hav- 
ing   been    baptised,  ;is    they    understood    the    rite,  and 

1  their  being  no  minister  in  New  England  who  had 
been  baptised  1»\  immersion  on  a  profession  of  faith, 
in  March,   1639,  Kzrldel   Holliman   baptised   Roger 


162  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Williams,  who  then  administered  the  rite  to  Holliman 
and  ten  others.'  Williams  had  been  ordained  in  the 
English  Church.  '  Thus  was  founded '  under  Roger 
Williams  as  Governor  of  Rhode  Island,  and  minister  of 
the  Lord  Jesus,  and  by  Ezekiel  Holliman,  Deputy 
Governor,  with  ten  others,  the  first  Baptist  church  on 
l,he  continent  of  America." 

For  this  quotation,  and  all  my  others  when  not 
otherwise  indicated,  I  am  indebted  to  a  History  of 
the  Baptists,  by  the  Rev.  A.  D.  Gtillette,  Pastor  of 
the  Eleventh  Baptist  church,  Philadelphia,  published 
in  Rupp's  Collection,  1844. 

But  though  this  was  the  origin  of  the  Baptist 
church  in  this  country,  it  was  not  the  origin  of  the 
communion  to  which  it  belongs.     Our  author  claims : 

That  persons  holding  Baptist  sentiments  have  ex- 
isted always  in  the  Church  ;  that  for  the  first  three  or 
four  centuries  after  Christ,  the  whole  Church  held  to 
such  sentiments — that  the  Novatians,  the  Donatists, 
the  Paulicians,  separated  from  the  Church  because 
sentiments  and  practices  of  an  opposite  character  were 
being  introduced — that  fleeing  from  the  persecutions 
of  the  Church  which  had  now  become  apostate,  they 
finally  settled  in  the  vallies  of  Piedemont  and  became 
what  was  afterwards  known  as  Albigenses  and  Wald- 
enses ;  that  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation  they  be- 
came scattered  throughout  Europe  and  sprang  up  in 
part  as  a  Baptist  church.  Bat  the  first  society  or 
church  of  Baptists  which  our  author  names  is  as  fol- 
lows :  "  The  British  Baptists  continued  to  multiply ; 
and  in  1689,  they,  with  forty  of  their  bishops  [preach- 
ers, for  they  had  no  Bishops  in  the  established  sense  of 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF  MODERN  SECTS.  163 

the  word,]  assembled  in  an  association  at  London  and 
adopted  a  confession  of  Faith ;  the  same  that  was  adop- 
ted by  the  Philadelphia  association  in  1742." 

♦  2.  Mr.  Gillette  refers  to  nothing  earlier      A  number 

°  of  persons, 

than  1689  which  can  be  regarded  as  the  though  hoid- 
origin  of  the  Baptists  as  a  church — for  most  ^w^Tre  not 
evidently  any   number  of  persons,    though  a   church, 

.,      .  ,  j     j  without  some 

agreeing  in  their  views,  cannot  be  regarded  organiZation. 
as  a  church  until  they  are  gathered  into 
some  bond  of  union,  with  a  formal  organization.  A 
church  is  a  society  of  persons,  and  implies  not  only 
the  existence  of  the  persons,  but  it  also  implies  that 
they  are  gathered  out  of  the  rest  of  the  world  and 
brought  together  either  in  some  place  or  within  some 
definite  and  visible  bond  of  union.  Mr.  Gillette  points 
out  no  such  association,  which  he  recognizes  as  a  Bap- 
tist church  before  the  one  named  above  in  1689.  I 
should  certainly  differ  from  him  on  this  point,  but  as 
the  difference  is  of  no  material  importance  to  our 
present  object,  I  will  not  take  up  the  time  to  point 
it  out. 

$  3.  There  is  no  need  that  we  should  go  The  BaP- 
into  the  history  of  the  Baptists  any  farther,  fore,  claim  an. 
for  the  purposes  of  our  present  inquiry.  Their  ° l h e r  a"  d 

r       i  i  »        *  more   modern 

claim  is  that  the  Church  or  Society  which  origin  than 
Christ  and  the  Apostles  founded,  early  be-  chheurcChhri8tmn 
came  apostate,  and  that  the  Baptist  church 
was  founded  some  centuries  later  by  persons  who 
seceded  from  the  apostatizing  Church  of  Christ.  Of 
course,  therefore,  the  Baptist  church  is  another,  and 
entirely  distinct  from  that  from  which  its  founders 
seceded. 


164  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

The  Baptists  claim  in  this  country  4,000,000  peo- 
ple, 1,000,000  members,  9,000  churches,  and  6,000 
ministers. 

§  4.  In  giving  the  origin  of  this  sect  I  shall 

origin  ami  f0n0 w  chiefly  the  account  by  the  Rev.  E. 

congregation-  W.  Andrews,  Pastor  of  the  Broadway  Tab- 

aiists-  ernacle,  New- York,  in  Rupp's  Collection,  p. 

184. 

"  The  origin  of  the  Congregationalists  as  a  modern 
sect  is  commonly  ascribed  to  Robert  Brown,  who  or- 
ganized a  church  in  England  in  1583.  But  it  appears 
probable  that  there  were  churches  formed  upon  con- 
gregational principles  in  the  reigns  of  Edward  VI.  and 
Queen  Mary,  although  it  is  impossible  to  speak  with 
any  certainty  concerning  them.  But  the  dividing  line 
between  the  supporters  of  the  Church,  and  the  non- 
conformists, was  not  distinctly  drawn  until  the  Acts  of 
Supremacy  and  Uniformity  passed  in  the  early  part  of 
Elizabeth's  reign.  From  this  period  there  was  little 
hope  of  permanent  reconciliation  between  them  and 
the  Church,  although  it  was  not  until  about  the  year 
1565  that  separate  assemblies  were  held.  It  is  from 
this  time  that  the  Puritans  are  to  be  regarded  as  a 
distinct  party." 

Brown's  church,  however,  seems  to  have  come  to 
nought,  and  many — perhaps  a  majority  of  the  early 
Puritans  or  non-conformists — were  Presbyterians  in 
principle. 

"  But  about  the  commencement  of  the  seven- 
teenth century  appeared  John  Robinson,  who  has,  not 
inappropriately,  been  called  the  Father  of  modern 
Congregationalism.     We  first  hear  of  him  as  a  pastor 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF  MODERN    SECTS.  165 

of  a  church  which  had  been  formed  in  the  north  of 
England  in  the    year  previous  to   Elizabeth's  death 

[March  1603.] "     But  not  finding  things  to  their 

mind  in  England,  they  left  for  Holland  in  1608,  and 

Mr.  Robinson  soon  followed.     " Mr.  Robinson  and 

his  congregation,  upon  their  arrival  in  Holland,  first 
joined  themselves  to  the  church  at  Amsterdam  [Dutch 
Reformed ;]  but  owing  to  the  dissensions  that  had 
broken  out  among  its  members,  at  the  end  of  a  year 
they  removed  to  Leyden.  In  the  year  1617,  Mr. 
Robinson  and  his  church  began  to  think  of  a  re- 
moval to  America.  Robinson  remained  with  the 
majority  at  Leyden,  and  Elder  Brewster  accompanied 

the  emigrants. "  They  arrived  at  Plymouth,  Mass., 

1620.  "  To  Mr.  Robinson  and  his  church  at  Leyden, 
in  the  old  world,  and  at  Plymouth  in  the  new,  we  owe 
the  first  modern  developments  of  the  principles  of  the 
congregational  polity." 

§  5.  At  first  the  Congregational  ists  ga-      The  Con' 

.  .  7.  gregationnl 

thered  their  congregations  within  the  bosom  church  formed 
of  the  Church  of  England,  then  they  went  'rom  J"*"1 

J  from  the  Eug- 

to  Holland,  and,  failing  to  gain  their  object  hsh    church 

,i  i  j     •         i  p  i  r  since   the  Re- 

tnere,  obtained  a  grant  oi  a  large  tract  of  forraation- 
land  in  America,  and  came  hither  to  settle. 

Of  course  there  is  no  pretence  that  these  Pilgrims 
were  the  Church  of  England. 

Mr.  Robinson  "  at  the  commencement  of  his 
ministry  among  the  separatists,  in  common  with 
Brown,  denounced  that  Church,  as  essentially  anti- 
christ i  an,  and  would  neither  regard  her  members  as 
brethren,  nor  hear  her  ministers  preach."  His  opinions 
underwent  some  change  after  this ;  "  yet  it  does  not 


166  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

appear  that  Mr.  Robinson  was  ever  willing  to  admit 
that  the  Church  of  England,  as  a  National  Establish- 
ment, was  a  Christian  Church,  although  he  communed 
with  its  individual  members." 

This  we  are  to  remember,  was  after  the  Reforma- 
tion— after  the  Church  of  England  had  adopted  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  as  the  Rule  of  Faith — after  the  adop- 
tion of  the  XXXIX  Articles  as  the  standard  of  her 
teaching  on  all  points  included  in  them. 

§  6.  The  complaints  against  the  Church 

The  grounds  *  ° 

of  their  sepa-  by  the  Puritans,  were,  at  first,  only  against 
ration  not  such  ^  ^  ^     clerical  garments — against 

as  to  be  essen-  o  o 

tiai  to  sai™-  ceremonies — and  certain  abuses  of  plurality, 
non-residence,  &c,  and  against  a  general 
laxity  of  discipline.  Granting  that  the  Puritans  were 
right  in  all  this,  these  abuses  did  not  endanger  the 
salvation  of  their  souls,  so  long  as  they  remained  in 
the  Church,  and  were  faithful  to  themselves :  and 
when  they  had  borne  their  testimony  against  them, 
and  "  refused  compliance,  yet  without  separation,"  as 
they  told  some  of  their  own  members,  that  they  must 
do  in  regard  to  themselves,  I  cannot  see  why  they  had 
not  done  all  that  was  required  of  them. 

The  Congre-       *  ?•  While    in    Holland,    the   Congrega- 
gationaiists do  tionalists  were  beyond  the  King's  dominions, 

not  claim  to  be  ,       ..  .,        _       ..   ,     _. 

a  branch  of  and  the  jurisdiction  ol  the  hnglish  Church. 
the    English  ^       claim  no  historic  connection  with  a 

Church. 

past  that  was  before  them.  They  do  not 
claim  to  have  been  founded  by  the  English  Church, 
or  any  other  branch  of  the  Church,  but  by  John  Rob- 
inson, and  other  secedersfrom  the  Church  in  England 
co-operating  with  him. 


V.]  -  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  167 

The  Congregationalists  have  160,000  members, 
1,300  congregations,  1,150  ministers,  chiefly  in  New 
England. 

t  8.  In  speaking  of  this  Sect  I  shall  fol-      The  ori«in 

1  and  history  of 

low  chiefly  Dr.  Brownlee's  Account  of  the  the  Dutch 
Dutch  Reformed  church,  in  Rupp's  Collec- fhurfc°hrraed 
tion— p.  220. 

"  The  Dutch  Reformed  church  is  the  oldest  church 
in  the  United  States,  which  adopts  the  Presbyterian 
form  of  church  government.  Its  history  begins  with 
the  history  of  New- York  and  New  Jersey.     It  is  a 

branch  of  the  National  church  of  Holland 

The  Dutch  West  India  Company  were  the  first  who 
carried  the  ministers  of  the  Grospel   from  Holland  to 

our  shores. "     Until  1772,  they  were  dependent 

upon  the  Classis  in  Holland. 

They  receive  as  their  Rule  of  Faith,  the  Confes- 
sions of  Faith,  &o.,  of  the  Synod  of  Dort. 

Now  upon  this  state  of  facts  two  questions  arise, 
one  relating  to  the  Dutch  Reformed  church  in  the 
old  country,  and  the  other  to  its  mission  in  this 
country. 

$9:  By  the  Bull  of  Paul  IV.,  May  19,    The  "Dutch 

J  '  J  '  Reformed 

1559,  and  confirmed  by  Pius  IV.,  January  church"  a 
8,  15(50,  the  Netherlands  were  constituted  J"8  JJ^86^ 
and  divided  as  follows:  Dutch  church. 

1.  Archbishopric  of  Mecheem,  containing 

the  Dioceses  of  Antwerp,  Bois  le  Due,  Ruremand, 
GatU,  and  Ypres. 

2.  Archbishopric  of  Cambray,  containing  Tourney ^ 
Arras,  St.  Omer,  anil  Namur. 

3.  Archbishopric  of  Utrecht,  containing  Harlem, 


168  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Midelburg,    Leeuwarden,    Groningen,    and    Deve ti- 
ter.1 

Now  I  do  not  design  to  claim  for  this  Bull  any 
special  authority.  But  the  Church  in  the  Nether- 
lands or  Low  countries  acquiesced  in  and  adopted  the 
new  arrangement,  and  it  became  therefore  a  part  of 
the  Church  arrangement  or  organization.  Amsterdam, 
when  the  Dutch  Reformed  church  began  its  exis- 
tance,  was  in  the  Diocese  of  Harlem  and  Province 
of  Utrecht.2 

The  Reformation  was  commenced  by  persons  in 
their  individual  capacity,  and  not  carried  on,  as  in 
England,  by  the  Church,  in  her  regular  course  of  eccle- 
siastical proceedings.  The  recognized  authorities  of 
the  Church  did  not  encourage  the  change  at  all,  but 
still  adhered  to  their  old  opinions.  The  Protestants, 
consequently  separated  from  the  Church,  and  formed 
themselves  into  a  new  church  on  the  Calvinistic  foun- 
dation. 

I  have  no  means  of  ascertaining  what  were  the  rela- 
tive numbers  of  the  two  parties — the  Catholics  and  the 
Protestants.  Yet  from  all  I  can  learn,  the  Catholics 
have  generally  been  the  most  numerous  ;  and  at  pres- 
ent, though  the  Dutch  Reformed  religion  is  established 
by  law,  the  Catholics  have  in  Amsterdam  twenty-two 
churches,  and  the  Dutch  Reformed  only  ten;  other 
Christian  denominations  together,  eight.3 

But  the  relative  numbers  is  not  very  important.  It 
is  always  hell  that  the  identity  of  a  society  depends  up- 

1  Brandt's  Hist.  Ref.  in  the  Netherlands,  Vol.i.p.  133,  Ed.  9,  1720. 

2  Ranke's  Hist,  of  the  Popes,  p.  242. 

3  Brooke's  Gazetteer,  by  Marshall.     1840.  Art.  Amsterdam. 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  169 

on  its  officers  and  recognized  authorities.  This  point 
was  clearly  established  in  the  famous  case  of  the  Pres- 
byterian church  of  York,  Penn.  The  court,  in  that 
case,  held  the  Old  School  to  be  the  Presbyterian  church, 
on  the  ground,  that  "  a  popular  body  is  known  only  by 
its  government  or  its  head,"  and  awarded  to  them  the 
name,  the  funds,  and  the  property ;  not  because  the 
New  School  "  were  thought  to  be  anything  else  than 
Presbyterians,"  but  because  the  recognized  head  and 
government'  of  the  church  remained  with  the  Old 
School,  or  rather,  the  Old  School  remained  with  the 
recognized  government,  and  the  New  School  were  de- 
clared seceders  and  their  church  a  new  one,  on  this 
ground.  This,  I  believe,  to  be  the  established  prin- 
ciple. 

We  must  therefore  decide  that  the  adherents  to  the 
Romish  Obedience,  in  Holland,  were  the  Old  Church, 
whether  they  were  the  minority  or  the  majority  in  point 
of  numbers.  And  in  that  case,  the  Protestants  were 
seceders,  as  they  acknowledged  themselves  to  be,  set- 
ting up  a  rival  sect  within  the  actual  jurisdiction  of 
the  Church  which  Christ  and  His  Apostles  had  estab- 
lished fifteen  hundred  years  before. 

$  10.   Finally— it  does  not  appear  that  the      The  Dutch 

J  .  .  .  Reformed 

Holland  Missionaries  came  into  this  country  came lato this 
for  the  purpose  of  building  a  Branch  of  the  Hm^*^ 

Church  of  Christ,  on  the  broad  b'oundat  ion  the  new  ho- 
laid  by  Christ  and  the  Apostles.       LheiT   OD-  thej  ,,,,.„,. 

ieol  was  t.»  establish  the  new  Rule  of  Faith,  »e,V"  h'^l'l 

■  founded. 

adopted  by  the  Holland  seceders  from   that 

Church,  and  to  extend  the  communion  or  church 
which   they  had  formed  on   their  own  terms  of  com- 


170 


THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  Chap. 


munion.  They  neither  took  the  Apostle's  nor  any  one 
of  the  ("reeds  of  the  Universal  Church  for  their  Rule 
of  Faith,  nor  did  they  manifest  any  serious  regard  for 
the  acknowledged  Creeds,  opinions  and  usages  of  the 
Primitive  ages  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  But  in  all 
respects  they  regarded  themselves  as  a  new  sect  or 
church — based,  indeed,  upon  the  Bible — but  still,  as  a 
church,  a  religious  society,  a  visible  community,  they 
considered  themselves  of  an  origin  more  recent  than  the 
commencement  of  the  Reformation.  They  were  not 
derived  from  the  Church  that  existed  before  the  Re- 
formation, in  any  way  which  that  Church  itself  or  any 
part  of  it,  would  acknowledge  to  be  valid. 

This  church  is  situated  chiefly  in  New- York  and 
New  Jersey.  It  has  21,569  families,  96,302  individ|- 
uals,  29,322   communicants,  267  churches,  and  259 

ministers. 

§11.  The  following  account  is  taken  J^g* 
from   Dr.  Mayer,  of   York,  Pa.,  in  Rupp's  the  German 

Reform  e  d 
Collection.  church. 

"  The  German  Reformed  church,  as  its 
name  imports,  comprises  that  portion  of  the  family  of 
reformed  churches  which  speak  the  German  language, 
and  their  descendants,  and  as  such  is  distinguished 
from  the  French  Reformed,  the  Dutch  Reformed,  &c. 
The  founder  of  this  church  was  Ulric  Zwingli,  a  na- 
tive of  Switzerland.  After  the  death  of  Zwingle  and 
(Ecolompadius  in  1531,  none  of  their  associates  enjoy- 
ed so  decided  a  superiority  over  his  brethren  as  to  give 
him  a  commanding  influence  over  the  whole  church, 
and  to  secure  to  him  the  chief  direction  of  her  coun- 
cils.    This  honor  was  reserved  for  John    Calvin,  the 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN  SECTS.  171 

French  Reformer.  Driven  from  his  own  country  by 
persecution,  he  came  to  Basil,  in  1534.  On  his  re- 
turn from  a  visit  to  the  Duchess  of  Ferrara  in  Italy, 
who  was  friendly  to  the  Reformation,  being  compelled 
by  the  war  to  take  the  route  through  Geneva,  he  came 
to  that  city  in  August,  1536,  and  was  persuaded  by 
Far  ell  and  Viret  to  remain  there  and  complete  the  re- 
formation which  they  had  begun." 

Thus  the  reformed  church  was  established  at  Ge- 
neva, in  1541,  with  Calvin  at  its  head. 

"  The  German  Reformed  church  in  the  United 
States  was  founded  by  emigrants  from  Germany  and 
Switzerland.  Its  origin  may  be  dated  about  the  year 
1740,  or  rather  somewhat  earlier.  The  principal  seat 
of  the  church  in  its  infancy  was  eastern  Pennsylvania, 
though  settlements  were  made  also,  and  congregations 
formed,  at  an  earlier  period  in  other  states,  particular- 
ly in  the  Carolinas,  Virginia,  Maryland,  New  Jersey 
and  New- York.  Its  doctrinal  system  is  derived  from 
Germany  and  Switzerland ;  but  its  ecclesiastical  poli- 
ty is  formed  after  the  model  of  the  Reformed  Dutch 
church  of  Holland,  by  whom  it  was  nurtured  and  pro- 
tected in  its  infant  state,  and  to  whom  it  owes  a  lar<Te 
debt  of  gratitude." 

The  lb'irfvlbe.rsr  Catechism  is  their  Rule  of  Faith. 

$  12.   It  is  perfectly  evident,  from  the  fore- 

1  J  Tbe   Ge  in- 

going  account  of    the    German    Reformed  nun  Refonn- 

church,  thai  it  docs  not  fulfil  the  conditions  ('.|;iillV  !l,"u! 
requisite    t<>   constitute   a    Branoh   <>f  that",ilv;i  s,Mt 

11  11-11  •  1  •  r  '  "  ttBd*d     llV 

Church    wlii.-li    has    existed    since    our    Lord  UMeZwingU. 

was  on  earth.     It    was  established  in  this 
country  by  members  of  the  German  Reformed  church 


172  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

in  Germany  and  Switzerland,  and  that  church,  as  Dr. 
Mayer  ingenuously  confesses,  "  was  founded"  byUlric 
Zwingle,  and  consisted  of  seceders  from  the  Church 
that  existed  in  those  countries  before  his  day. 
Mosheim  says  the  same  thing  of  them: 
"  The  founder  of  the  Reformed  church  was  Ulric 
Ziving-li,  a  Swiss,  an  acute  man,  and  a  lover  of  truth." 
(Cent.  xvr.  Sect.  in.  c.  n.  $  3.) 

$  13.  In  order  to  judge  the  better  of  the     ^history 

0       °  of  their  origin 

ecclesiastical  position  of  this   religious  com-  examined 

.,.,!!  i       j  l       still  further. 

munion,  it  will  be  necessary  to  recur  to  the 
history  of  its  origin. 

As  early  as  1519,  Leo  X.,  Bishop  of  Rome,  author- 
ized Robert  Simson,  a  Franciscan  or  gray  Friar,  of 
Milan,  to  preach  indulgences  at  Zurich,  in  the  Diocese 
of  Constance.  The  indignation  of  Zwinglius  was 
aroused,  and  he  began  to  inveigh  against  the  abuse. 
At  first,  Hugh,  Bishop  of  Constance,  approved  his 
course,  and  sanctioned  his  opposition  to  the  prevailing 
abuses  and  corruptions  in  the  Church.  But  in  a  short 
time,  the  Reformer  became  so  indiscreet  and  head- 
long— denying  some  most  sacred  truths,  as  well  as 
many  of  the  prevailing  errors — that  his  Bishop  and  the 
other  ecclesiastical  authorities  found  it  necessary  to 
acquit  themselves  of  all  responsibility  for  what  he 
might  do  and  teach.  Zwinglius  was  in  all  probability 
the  most  popular  and  powerful  preacher  among  the 
Reformers.  His  indefatigable  zeal  against  the  gross 
and  intolerable  abuses  of  the  age,  gained  him  friends  : 
and  in  1523,  the  Senate  of  Zurich  summoned  the  Bish- 
op of  the  Diocese,  and  the  other  ecclesiastics  of  the 
Canton,  to  appear  before  them  and  answer  to  the  doc- 


V.]  ORIGIN    OF   MODERN   SECTS.  173 

trines  of  Zwindius.  Now  the  Senate  neither  had,  nor 
was  acknowledged  to  have,  any  authority  in  matters 
of  faith.  It  was  not  an  ecclesiastical  or  religious  body 
at  all,  any  more  than  the  Legislature  of  New-York,  or 
the  Congress  of  the  United  States.  The  Bishop  and 
ecclesiastics,  constituting  the  lawful  and  recognized 
representatives  of  the  Church,  protested  against  this  as- 
sumption and  against  the  Senate's  right  to  judge  in 
the  matter.  They  however,  decided  in  favor  of  Zwin- 
glius,  and  called  a  more  general  assembly  to  be  held 
at  the  close  of  the  month  of  October,  in  the  same  year. 
The  Senate  invited  the  Bishops  of  Constance,  Chur  or 
Coire,  and  Basel,  and  the  University  of  the  latter  place, 
and  the  Twelve  Cantons  of  Switzerland,  to  appear  be- 
fore them.  I  do  not  find  that  these  ecclesiastical  per- 
sonages paid  any  attention  to  the  invitation,  except 
that  the  Bishop  of  Constance  in  whose  Diocese  Zurich 
was  situated,  "  wrote  to  the  Senate  to  urge  them  to 
preserve  the  ancient  religion."  '  The  Senate  issued  a 
Decree  in  favor  of  the  Zwinglians. 

§  14.   The  Church,  however,  continued  on    Th0  rhurch 

'  *  continued  not- 

;i-  before,  in  all  its  functions   and  ministra-  withstanding 

tinns.    lint  withstanding  the    Opposition  of  the  ">e  secessions. 

otdar    authorities    and    the   reduction   of 
cumbers,  occasioned  by  the  secession  of  the  Zwing- 
lians     Tlir  sreeders,  though  but  a  minority,  formed 
themselves  into  what   is   now  called  the  German  Re- 
formed  ohuroh. 

§  15.  kt  Geneva  this  Seot  was  introduced     mused 
in  LOol,  chiefly   in   consequence,   as    \  nlal 
says,  of  the  alliance  of  the  Cantons  of  Berne 

1  Vidai.'s  Continuation  of  Fit  Hty,  vol.  iv.  p.  518,589,  Ed.  1887. 


174  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

and  Friburg,  in  order  to  defend  themselves  against  the 
Duke  of  Savoy.  The  inhabitants  of  Berne  brought 
along  with  them  their  preacher  Farel  and  made  him 
preach  daily  in  the  Cathedral  of  St.  Peter's,  Greneva. 
The  Discourses  of  Farel  and  Viret  soon  made  such  an 
impression  that  their  views  were  established  as  the 
public  religion  by  the  village  Council,  a  purely  secular 
body,  in  1535.  It  allowed  each  person,  however,  the 
liberty  to  embrace  which  religion  he  pleased — the  new 
or  the  old.  The  Zwinglians  compelled  Peter  de  La- 
baume,  the  Bishop,  to  leave  the  city.  He  retired  to 
Annecy,  a  village  of  Savoy,  about  16  miles  from  Grene- 
va, and  established  the  See  of  the  Diocese  there,  where 
it  remains  to  this  day.  The  number  of  the  seceders 
was  daily  increased  by  immigrants  from  France,  and 
thus  soon  gained  the  ascendency.1 

As  we  have  already  seen,  Calvin  came  to  Greneva 
in  1536.  In  1541,  he  was  placed  not  only  at  the  head 
of  the  church  into  which  these  separatists  had  formed 
themselves,  but  also  at  the  head  of  the  secular  gov- 
ernment. 

The  Ger-        §  16.  As  at  Zurich,  so  at  Greneva  and  else- 
man  Reform- where     therefore     the    Qermgin    Reformed 

ed    incapable  '  7 

of  extending  church  was  made  up  of  those  who  seceded 

the   commun-  c  j_i        /-^ii  1  j_-  •  ±  i  i 

ionofChrist,s  irom  the  Lhurch,  rejecting  its  regular  and 
church.  acknowledged  authorities — retiring  from  its 
congregations  to  form  new  ones  of  their  own,  taking  a 
new  name  and  proceeding  in  a  new  manner  altogeth- 
er, whilst  the  old  Church  continued  its  functions  and 
ministrations  as  before.     They  were,  therefore,  merely 

1  Vidal's  Continuation,  voL  vi  p.  598. 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN  SECTS.  175 

a  sect  of  seceders,  and  no  part  of  that  visible  society 
which  had  existed  from  the  days  of  the  Apostles.  And 
therefore,  although  they  might,  and  did — as  history 
proves — extend  their  church  into  America,  and  other 
countries,  yet  the  Church  of  Christ,  whose  visible 
communion  they  had  left,  they  were  entirely  incapa- 
ble of  extending  until  they  should  return  to  its  com- 
munion. 

I  enter  now  into  no  comparison  between  the  doc- 
trinal or  moral  purity  of  the  Church,  as  it  then  existed 
in  Switzerland,  and  that  of  the  new  church  of  the 
seceders.  I  grant,  for  all  present  purposes,  that  the 
result  of  such  a  comparison  might  be  vastly  and  alto- 
gether in  favor  of  the  latter.  But  be  that  as  it  may, 
it  is  in  vain  to  attempt  to  call  them  what  they  were 
not,  what  they  never  considered  themselves  and  what 
they  never  claimed  to  be — a  part  of  that  continuous 
visible  Society  or  Church  which  our  Blessed  Lord 
founded,  and  which  had  existed  from  its  first  establish- 
ment to  their  day.  They  had  seceded  from  that 
Church,  as  they  thought,  for  a  just  cause.  They  had 
done  what  they  considered  to  be  the  best  thing  that 
they  could  do  under  the  circumstances — and  what 
they  believed  the  necessities  of  the  case  would  justify. 
But  it  was  either  their  misfortune  or  their  fault  that 
they  were  a  new  sect  and  not  the  old  Church  of 
Christ. 

$  17.   Nor,  even  in  this,  let  anv  one  sun-       Tlu>'  did 

not     oontlder 

pose  that  1   am  Baying  of   them    what   thej  thair  podtloo 
did  not  admit  to  be  true  of  themselves.  Thus  ■*•*«* 
Calvin,   the    very    highest    authority    among   them, 
said,  "  I   know  how  great  are  our  deficiencies,  [in  an 


176  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

ecclesiastical  point  of  view,]  and  certainly  if  Grod 
should  call  us  this  day  to  an  account,  it  would  be 
difficult  for  us  to  make  an  excuse."  [difficilis  esset 
excusatio.]  Viret,  of  whom  we  have  before  spoken, 
says  the  same:  "Many  things  are  yet  necessary  for 
us  in  order  that  we  may  have  the  full  regimen  of  the 
Church."  Calvin  also,  in  his  reply  to  Cardinal  Sa- 
dolet  says,  in  behalf  of  himself  and  his  German  Re- 
formed church,  "  We  do  not  deny  that  we  are  destitute 
of  the  regimen  which  the  ancient  Church  had."  Beza, 
Calvin's  successor,  said,  "  Think  not  that  we  wish  to 
abolish  that  which  is  eternal,  to  wit,  the  Church  of 
Grod.  Think  not  that  we  search  after  arguments  by 
which  to  depress  you  to  this  our  wretched  and  vile 
condition."  Writing  to  Archbishop  Grrindal  of  Eng- 
land, he  says  "that  we  are  as  yet  far  from  what  we 
ought  to  be,  we  willingly  confess."  The  context 
shows  beyond  a  question  that  he  referred  to  their  eccle- 
siastical position.  The  son  of  Peter  Du  Moulin, 
another  of  their  distinguished  writers,  says : — "  But 
the  generous  and  illuminate  souls  make  no  difficulty 
to  acknowledge  openly  the  scantiness  of  their  church 
government,  and  that  their  bed  is  shorter  than  that 
they  can  stretch  themselves  on  it,  and  their  covering 
narrower  than  that  they  can  wrap  themselves  in  it. 
But  as  short  and  narrow  as  it  is,  they  must  keep  it  by 
an  invincible  necessity."  He  also  says,  that  so  far  as 
ecclesiastical  power  [power  to  do  anything  as  a  church] 
is  concerned,  it  is  a  perfect  interregnum,"  i.  e.,  there 
is  none.  In  addition,  I  will  only  refer  to  the  fact  that 
Calvin  himself  made  application  to  the  Church  of 
England,  to  ordain  him   Bishop,  and  thus  constitute 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN    SECTS.  177 

him  and  his  followers,  a  Branch  of  the  Church  at 
Geneva.  The  application  was  intercepted  by  Roman- 
ists. But  it  is  in  itself  a  confession  of  the  truth  of  all 
that  I  have  said  or  need  to  say  for  our  present  purpose 
of  the  detects  of  the  German  Reformed  church. 

This  sect  claims  750  congregations,  192  ministers. 

$  18.   The  name  officially  adopted  by  the 
Lutheran  reformers  was  the   "  Evangelical  history  of  the 

Church."  Evangelical 

Lutheran 

"  As  Germany  was  the  cradle  of  the  Re-  church, 
formation,  she  was  also  the  primitive  seat  of 
that  church  which  grew  out  of  the  Reformation  in  the 
land  of  Luther.  The  Germans,  after  they  had  thrown 
off  the  yoke  of  Rome,  through  the  instrumentality  of 
their  countryman  Luther,  and  others,  constituted 
themselves  a  reformed  evangelical  church  which  has 
been  denominated  Lutheran."  The  Elector  of  Saxony 
early  instituted  measures  by  which  the  Lutheran  re- 
ligion was  established  throughout  his  dominions.  The 
treaty  of  Passau  1552,  in  which  the  Elector  gained 
some  important  concessions  from  the  Emperor  Charles 
V.,  after  the  surprise  at  Inspruck,  is  regarded  by  the 
Lutherans  as  the  basis  of  their  religious  freedom.  A 
hiet  assembled  at  Augsburg,  1555,  declared  that  all 
who  adopted  the  Augsburg  Confession  [all  Lutherans] 
should  lor  the  future  be  considered  entirely  free  from 

the  jurisdiction  of  the  Etonian  Pontiff,  and  from   the 

authority  and  supervision  of  the  Bishops  (who  retained 
their  allegianee  to  Home,)  that    all   the  inhabitants   of 

the  Gtarman  Empire  should  he  allowed  to  judge  for 
themselves,  and  to  join  the  ohuroh  whose  doctrine  and 

8* 


178  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

worship  they  thought  most  pure  and  Scriptural — i.  e., 
the  old  or  the  new. 

$  19.   This  sect  presents  to  our  considera- 

The  move-    .  .      . 

ment    began  tion  substantially  the  same  state  of  facts  as 
by  individuals  fae  one  jast  revjewed#     The  movement  was 

in  their  indi- 
vidual capaci-  commenced  by  an  individual  in  the  Diocese  of 

nnaiiy^estlb-  Brandenburg,  soon  gained   the  favor  of  the 
iished  by  the  secular  arm  in  the  person  of  the  Elector  ot 

Civil  Authori- 

ty.  fcaxony,  and  the  seceders  became  established 

as  a  new  sect ;  the  Church  still  continuing, 
(though  of  course  diminished  in  numbers  by  the 
secessions,)  in  the  full  performance  of  its  functions  as 
before. 

The  Diet  is  a  secular  body,  and  no  representative 
of  the  Church  in  matters  of  faith.  It  consisted  of  lay- 
men with  the  exception  of  the  Archbishops  of  Mentz, 
Treves  and  Cologne,  and  the  two  spiritual  benches  in 
the  second  Chamber.1  From  the  time  of  Otho  I., 
[Emp.  936,]  the  kings  of  Germany  had  found  it  for 
their  advantage  to  balance  the  power  of  their  nobles 
by  endowing  the  Bishops  with  whole  counties  as  fiefs.3 
This  of  course  gave  them  a  seat  in  the  secular  coun- 
cils of  the  Empire,  as  temporal  lords  or  nobility.  The 
Diet  was,  notwithstanding,  as  a  legislature,  exclusively 
secular,  as  much  so  as  the  American  Congress. 

The  intro-         §20.  It  was  from  the  church  thus  reform- 
ductionorthe    d    indoctrinated  and  established,  that  the 

Evangelical         ' 

Lutherans  German  Lutheran  Christians  in  the  United 

ted  states.       States,  descended.     After  the  establishment 

of  the  Luthern  church  in  Germany  by  the 

1  Beande's  Encyclop.  in  voc.        a  Giesler's  Text  Book,  "vol.  ii.  p.  91. 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  179 

labors  of  Luther,  Melancthon  and  others,  about  1525, 
the  Lutheran  doctrines  were  extensively  diffused  and 
adopted.  The  earliest  settlement  of  Lutherans  in  this 
country  was  made  by  emigrants  from  Holland  to  New- 
York  soon  after  the  first  establishment  of  the  Dutch  in 
that  city,  1621.  To  this,  settlement  succeeded  that  of 
the  Swedes  on  the  Delaware  in  1636.  The  third 
settlements  of  the  Lutherans  in  this  country,  was 
that  ot  the  Germans  which  gradually  spread  over 
Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  Virginia,  the  interior  of  New- 
York,  and  the  Western  States.  The  year  1820  has 
been  mentioned  as  the  date  of  the  formation  of  the 
General  Synod  of  the  American  Lutheran  church. 
(Chiefly  from  the  Article  in  Rupp.) 

The  Augsburg-  Confession  is  the  Rule. .of  Faith  for 
the  Evangelical  Lutherans. 

$  21.    The    interval    between    the    first  The  occasio« 

of  liuther's 

preaching  of  Luther  and  the  establishment  mo rement 
of  his  church  is  full  of  events  of  the  most  a"d  its  ravora- 

ble  reception. 

interesting  and  important  character.     Luther 

* 

was  oalled  out  by  the  sale  of  indulgences  and  other 
abuses  in  the  Church.  At  first  his  efforts  were  looked 
upon  with  favor  by  the  Church  and  her  authorities  in 
immediate  jurisdiction,  and  in  more  instances  than 
one,  there  seemed  a  prospect  of  a  substantial  reforma- 
tion in  the  Church  instead  of  mere  secessions  from  it. 
$  22.   Bui  there  were  points  in   Luther's 

Oweae  which 

oharaoter  which  operated  greatly  to  the  dis- exerted  an 
advantage  of  such  a  boly  oause.     And  still  ,"""™1*lu 

mill 


luence. 


more  than  this,  the  recklessness  of  some  of 
his  opinions  and  measures  greatly  diminished   his  in- 
fluence over  those,  whose  eo-operat  ion  was  of  the  utmost 


180  THF   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

importance.  As  instances  of  what  I  mean,  take  the 
following.  He,  a  man  bound  by  the  most  solemn  vows, 
which  he  had  voluntarily  undertaken,  made  not  unto 
man,  but  to  God,  to  live  an  unmarried  life,  had  mar- 
ried a  woman,  Catharine  de  Bora,  under  similar 
vows  of  celibacy — a  step  which  outraged  the  pious 
sentiments  of  the  best  men  of  the  age.  He  sanctioned 
polygamy,  and  consequently  adultery  in  the  Landgrave 
of  Hesse,  and  he  had  carried  his  doctrine  of  justifica- 
tion by  faith  to  such  an  extent  that  he  was  obliged  to 
disparage  one  of  the  books  of  the  Holy  Scripture — the 
epistle  of  St.  James — calling  it  "an  Epistle  of  straw,"1 
and  denying  that  it  was  written  by  the  inspiration  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  These  things  went  far  to  destroy  his 
influence  with  those  who  would  have  carried  the 
Church  with  them  if  they  had  moved  in  the  matter, 
and  left  him  to  be  merely  the  head  of  a  sect  of  fol- 
lowers whom  he  had  persuaded  out  of  its  communion. 
,«..-.  §  23.  I  misrht  also  quote  a  list  of  confes- 

The  Luther-  °  * 

ans  also  con-  sions  of  deficiency  and  destitution  of  what 
deficiencies,  they  considered  essential  to  the  Ministry  and 
Sacraments  of  the  Church  from  the  founders 
of  the  Lutheran  sect,  similar  to  those  I  have  quoted 
from  the  founders  of  the  German  Reformed.  But  it  is 
not  necessary  to  take  up  the  time  and  room  to  repeat 
them. 

The  Luther-        h  24.  Now,  with  these  facts  before  us,  we 
ans,  therefore,  cannot  doubt  that  the  Lutheran  church  was 

a  new  beet. 

a  new  sect   founded  within  the  very  bosom 
of  the  Church,  which  continued  still  to  exist  notwith- 

1  "  Epistolam  Stramineam." 


V.]  ORIGIN  OF   MODERN   SECTS.  181 

standing  its  loss  of  numbers  and  opposition.  Nay,  the 
Lutherans  neither  then  nor  to  this  day,  regard  them- 
selves as  anything  else  than  a  new  church,  recently 
founded  by  those  who  had  seceded  from  the  Catholic 
Church  in  Germany. 

I  admit  that  the  Church  was  excessively  corrupt, 
and  such  cases  present  the  question  (if  we  choose  so  to 
consider  it)  whether  it  is  better  to  be  in  the  Church 
with  the  errors  and  corruptions  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, or  to  have  the  Truth  and  be  out  of  it.  Yet  this 
is  all  that  we  can  say  of  the  Lutherans — all  that  they 
said  of  themselves — namely,  that  they  had  the  Truth, 
but  were  a  sect  out  of  the  Church.  Of  course,  there- 
fore, any  religious  society  or  communion  which  they 
can  found  in  this  country  or  elsewhere,  cannot  be 
identified  with  that  Church  which  they  left  in  order  to 
be  Lutherans. 

The  statistics  of  this  sect  are  1,371  congregations, 
424  ministers,  140,300  communicants. 

$  2'3.  This  sect  is  probablv  to  be  regarded      The 

1  "  CT  Menonites. 

as  more  nearly  the  descendants  and  repre- 
sentatives of  the  Albi<renses  or  Waldenses  than  any 
oilier  now  in  existence. 

"The  Menonitea  fully  acknowledge  that  they 
derive  their  Dame  from  Mkxno  Simon,  a  native  of 
Witmarsum,  horn  in  Friesland,  a.  d.  1495.  In  1530 
he  was  induced  to  examine  the  New  Testament  for 
himself,  and  his  views  were  materially  changed,  lie 
now  commenced  to  travel  with  a  view  to  oonsuU  some 
of  his  ootemporaries,  such  as  Luther.  Buoer,  Bullinger 
and  others.  He  distinctly  repudiated  the  extravagances 
of    the     Munsteritet   or    Anabaptists,   yet     assumed 


182  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

among  them,  at  their  earnest  solicitation,  the  rank  and 
functions  of  a  public  Teacher.  In  1537,  he  com- 
menced travelling  among  the  Anabaptists,  or  descend- 
ants of  the  ancient  Waldenses,  all  of  whom  were  as 
scattered  sheep  of  the  House  of  Israel.  He  visited 
East  and  West  Friesland,  the  province  of  Grroningen, 
and  then  went  to  Holland,  Gruilderland,  Brabant, 
Westphalia,  and  continued  through  the  German  Pro- 
vinces, that  lie  on  the  coast  of  the  Baltic  Sea,  and 
penetrated  as  far  as  Livonia.  In  these  places  his  min- 
isterial labors  were  attended  with  remarkable  success, 
and  added  a  prodigious  number  of  followers." 

§  26.  Now  in  all  these  countries  the 
foraCTamong  Church  was  established,  but  Meno  allied 
the    Anabap-  himself  with  those  who  were  out  of  its  com- 

tists. 

munion.  Whether  he  found  them  already- 
organized  as  sects,  or  organized  them  himself,  or  left 
them  unorganized,  it  is  immaterial  so  far  as  their 
identity  with  the  Church  is  concerned. 

His  object,  says  his  historian,  Christian  Herr,  of 
Pequea,  a  bishop  of  the  Mennonite  church,  "  was  re- 
formation and  spiritual  edification  of  his  fellow  men. 
He  purified  the  doctrines  of  the  Anabaptists — he  re- 
tained some  of  them,  and  he  excluded  others  who 
were  tainted  with  the  Munsterite  heresy.  He  founded 
many  communities  in  various  parts  of  Europe." 

Thus  we  see  that  he  was  a  reformer  amongst  the 
Anabaptists,  a  body  totally  distinct  in  all  its  visible 
relations  and  connections,  from  the  Church  which  we 
are  seeking  to  identify. 

$  27.  "  From  the  year  1537,  the  Mennonites  suf- 
fered great  persecutions  in  Europe.     They  were  com- 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  183 

pelled  to  flee  from  one  country  to  another. 

The  Men- 
Many  came  to  Pennsylvania  as  early  as  1683.  nonitea  Intro- 

Before   1735  there  were  probably  rising  of  |^  *  thi8 
five  hundred  families  in  Lancaster  county, 
Pa.     In  1727,  they  translated  and  published  their  con- 
fession of  faith. 

$  28.  Of  course    I  would  not   associate      The  Men* 

nonites  proba- 

them  with  the  Anabaptists  or  Munsterites  biy  an  offshoot 
any  farther  than  they  choose  such  an  associa-  °gn  *„e  MJ^ 
tion  for  themselves.  Yet  the  common  course  Waidenses. 
with  ecclesiastical  historians,  is  to  regard 
the  Anabaptists  as  a  development  of  the  Albigenses, 
and  both  the  Baptists  and  the  Mennonites  as  descend- 
ants of  the  Anabaptists,  though  it  is  admitted  on  all 
hands,  that  both  these  sects  have  repudiated  much  of 
their  ancestry.  There  is  good  foundation  for  this 
view.  But  that  is  immaterial  to  our  present  purpose. 
Whether  we  refer  the  origin  of  the  sect  to  Menno,  or 
consider  him  merely  as  a  reformer  in  the  sect ;  the 
sect  itself  is  a  body  of  seceders  which  sprung  up  in 
Germany,  and  has  finally  come  to  be  established  in 
this  country.  It  claims  no  identity,  no  visible  connec- 
tion, union  or  communion  with  the  Church  that 
existed  before  them. 

They  claim   120,000  people,  240  ministers,  130 
places  of  worship,  50  or  60,000  members. 

$  29.   The    following  account  is  abridged     The  Melh°- 

(lists. 

from  the  ELev.  Hr.  Bangs,  of  New- York : — 

"The,  well-known  founder  of  Methodism,  under 
God,  was  the   Rev.  John   Wesley,  a  presbyter  of  the 

Church  of  England,  who  after  his  own  conversion,  set 

out  with  a  simple  desire  to  revive  pore  am)  andefiled 


1S4  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 


religion  in  the  Church  of  which  he  was  a  member  and 
a  minister." 

occasion  of  §  30.  Dr.  Bangs  has  not  given  an  account 
their  Rise.  0f  foe  occasion  and  rise  of  Methodism  in 
England.  I  will,  therefore,  interrupt  his  narrative 
to  speak  of  it  somewhat. 

From  the  Revolution  in  England,  1688,  in  conse- 
quence of  important  changes  in  the  ecclesiastical 
management,  there  commenced  a  rapid  and  sad  de- 
cline in  the  state  of  religion  in  the  English  Church. 
Daily  Prayer,  from  being  neglected  and  omitted, 
came  to  be  regarded  as  not  at  all  obligatory — then  un- 
necessary, and  even  superstitious.  The  Church's  holy 
seasons,  for  Prayer,  Fasting  and  Repentance,  were 
neglected.  The  Holy  Communion  was  less  and  less 
frequently  administered,  and  in  some  cases  it  was 
celebrated  only  on  the  three  times  in  the  year  required 
by  the  laws  of  the  land.  Discipline  was  relaxed  and 
worldly  indifference  was  the  prevailing  characteristic. 
Wesley  and  a  few  others  combined  for  the  purposes  of 
greater  piety  and  a  more  faithful  use  of  the  means  of 
grace  pointed  out  for  her  members  by  the  English 
Church.  This  procured  for  them  the  name  of  Metho- 
dists, which  the  sect  that  grew  out  of  the  movement 
still  retain.  In  1738,  he  visited  Germany,  and  on  his 
return  he  commenced  those  systematic  labors  which 
resulted  in  the  foundation  of  his  sect.  The  foundation 
of  separate  congregations  in  England  is  commonly  as- 
signed to  1739. 

The  Rise  of       $  31.  We   now  return  to  our    narrative 
Methodism  in  from  jjr   Bangs  : — 

this  Country. 

"  The  Methodist  society  in  America  was 


V.]  ORIGIN"    OF  MODERN    SECTS.  185 

established  in  the  city  of  New- York,  in  the  year  1766. 
A  few  pious  emigrants  from  Ireland,  who  previously 
to  their  removal  had  been  members  of  the  Methodist 
society  in  their  own  country,  landed  in  this  city. 
Among  their  number  was  Mr.  Philip  Embury,  their 
local  preacher.  This  party  soon  became  very  disso- 
lute in  their  morals,  until  a  pious  woman  went  into  the 
room  where  they  were  assembled — seized  the  cards 
with  which  they  were  playing  and  threw  them  into 
the  fire.  She  turned  to  Mr.  Embury  and  said  that  he 
must  preach  to  them.  And  accordingly  he  preached 
his  first  sermon  in  his  own  hired  house  to  five  persons 
only.  This,  it  is  believed,  was  the  first  Methodist 
-   rmon  ever  preached  in  America,  Oct.  30,  1768. 

"  In  1784,  we  come  to  an  important  era  in  the 
history  of  this  sect.  Up  to  this  time  their  preachers 
had  been  considered  as  laymen  having  no  authority  to 
administer  the  ordinances,  and  hence  the  members  of 
the  societies  had  been  dependent  upon  other  ministers 
for  the  rite  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper.  In 
1770,  to  avoid  this  difficulty,  some  of  the  southern 
preachers  had  begun  to  ordain  each  other.  Through 
the  influence  of  Mr.  Asbury  this  practice  had  been 
discontinued,  and  on  the  2d  of  September  1784,  Mr. 
Wesley,  assisted  by  other  presbyters,  consecrated 
Thomas  Coke,  LL.  D.,  then  a  presbyter  in  the  Church 
of  England,  as  superintendent,  and  Likewise  ordained 
two  others  to  the  office  of  Elders,  and  senl  them  over 
to  A.merioa,  with  instructions  to  organise  the  societies 
here  into  a  separate  and  independent  ohuroh,  furnish- 
ing them  with  ion  i  is  of  ordinations  for  deans,  [deacons  ?] 
elders  and  superintendents,  for  administering  baptism, 


186  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

and  the  consecration  and  administration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper.  At  a  Conference  called  for  that  purpose  in 
Baltimore,  December  25,  1784,  the  measures  were 
unanimously  approved  of.  Dr.  Coke  was  recognized 
in  his  character  of  Superintendent,  and  Mr.  Asbury 
was  elected  to  the  same  office,  and  consecrated  by 
Dr.  Coke,  on  the  27th  of  the  same  month.  Several 
others  were  ordained  deacons  and  elders  at  the  same 
time." 

TheMeth-        §  32.  The    founders    of    the    Methodist 
odists  did  not  church  in  this  country  Were  men  who  had 

claim   to    be  J 

a  Branch  of  been,  and  were  at  that  time,  some  of  them 
church!8  1S  a*  least>  members  of  the  English  Church. 
Yet  in  what  they  did,  they  did  not  act  with 
the  sanction  of  that  Church  ;  the  society  which  they 
founded  was  not  received  into  the  communion  with  it, 
and  never  sought  to  be  so  received.  It  made  no 
claims  to  be  a  branch  of  that  Church.  In  the  func- 
tion of  ordination  which  Mr.  Wesley  took  upon  him- 
self to  perform,  he  transcended  the  authority  which  in 
the  view  of  the  Church  of  England,  he,  as  a  Presbyter 
merely,  possessed.  Nor  do  even  the  men  whom  he 
ordained,  seem  to  have  been  satisfied  with  their  ordin- 
ation ;  for  both  Dr.  Coke  and  Mr.  Asbury  sought  or- 
dination from  the  American  Bishops,  Seabury  of  Con- 
necticut, and  White  of  Penn.1 

No  one,  with  these  facts  before  him,  would  for  one 
moment  pretend  that  there  was  any  identity  between 
the  Methodist  church  and  the  Church  of  England,  by 
whose  members  it  was  founded. 

1  See  White's  Memoirs,  p.  168. 


V.]  ORIGIN  OF   MODERN   SECTS.  187 

6  33.  It  is  sometimes    claimed  by   the     ^  werf 

*  '  .     .  no*    acknowl- 

Methodists,  that  their  church  and  ministra-  edged  as  a 
tions   are  valid,   because  they    are  derived  ^English 
from  men  who  were  ordained  in  the  English  church. 
Church,  and  therefore  had  the  right  and  authority  to 
do  what  they  did. 

Now  in  the  first  place,  it  never  has  been  held  or 
acknowledged  in  any  branch  of  the  Church,  that  a 
presbyter  is  competent  to  ordain.  Without  going  into 
this  question  at  all  in  this  place,  I  will  only  say, 
that  so  long  as  the  rule  is  held  by  the  Church,  its  vio- 
lation by  any  number  of  persons  under  such  circum- 
stances, will  constitute  them  a  new  sect  which  the 
Church  will  not  own  to  be  a  part  of  itself;  and  there- 
fore of  necessity,  whether  in  the  right  or  the  wrong,  it 
will  be  a  different  and  diverse  body. 

§  34.  But  again :  Though  it  be  conceded  The  Foun- 
or  proved  that  Mr.  Wesley  and  the  other  Methodist 
presbyters  were  competent  to  ordain  others,  Secti°si  their 

.  l  it*        authority  as 

and  even  a  Bishop,  (for  that  was  the  office  soon  as  they 
to  which  Dr.  Coke  and  Mr.  Asbury  were  cVurch!^ 
appointed,)  yet  it  must  be  done  in  the  Church  which  theyre- 
and  for  the  Church.  The  ministerial  au-  found an0[ner. 
thority  is  circumscribed  to  acts  for  and 
villi  in  the  Church.  Suppose  the  Ministry  of  Christ 
should  undertake  to  preach  Platonism  for  the  Gospel, 
would  it  be  attended  with  the  same  saving  efficacy? 
Suppose  they  should  go  and  administer  the,  sacraments 
of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  to  some  unconverted 

heathen:  would  these  sacraments  be  of  any  efficacy 
to  them?  Surely  not.  So,  too,  with  ordination.  It 
is  a  power   given  for  the  purpose   of   supplying  the 


!88  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  Chap 

Church  with  men  "  for  the  work  of  the  Ministry,  for 
the  perfection  of  the  Saints,  and  for  the  edifying  the 
Body  of  Christ,"1  all  of  which  is  to  be  done  in  the 
Church.  If,  therefore,  those  possessing  this  power, 
should  exercise  it  for  any  other  purpose,  their  act 
would  have  no  validity  or  force  whatever. 

Now  beyond  question,  such  is  the  case,  where  one 
having  authority  for  ordination  in  the  Church  exer- 
cises that  authority  in  laying  a  foundation  on  which 
he  himself  or  others  are  to  build  a  new  sect.  No  mat- 
ter by  whom  performed,  such  acts  have  no  validity. 
w    .  §  35.  It  is  a  singular  fact,  that  as  in  the 

Wesley  •>  *->  7 

never  intend-  case  0f  almost  all  the  founders  of  the  modern 
Founder  of  a  sects,  they  did  not  believe  that  they  could, 
Sect-  under    the    circumstances,   found  a  society 

that  should  be  a  Branch  of  the  Church,  so  also  it  was 
in  the  case  of  Wesley. 

Thus  Wesley  says  : — 

"  At  the  first  meeting  of  all  our  preachers  in  con- 
ference in  June  1744,  I  exhorted  them  to  keep  to  the 
Church  ;  observing  that  this  was  our  peculiar  glory — 
not  to  form  any  new  sect,  but  abiding  in  our  own 
Church,  to  do  to  all  men  all  the  good  we  possibly 
could. 

"  But  as  more  dissenters  joined  us,  many  of  whom 
were  much  prejudiced  against  the  Church,  these,  with 
or  without  design,  were  continually  infusing  their  own 
prejudices  into  their  brethren. 

"  I  saw  this  and  gave  warning  of  it  from  time  to 
time  both  in  private  and  in  public,  and   in  the   year 

1  Eph.  iv.  12. 


V.]  ORIGIN  OF   MODERN   SECTS.  189 

1758  I  resolved  to  bring  the  matter  to  a  fair  issue.  So 
I  desired  the  point  might  be  considered  at  large 
whether  it  was  expedient  for  the  Methodists  to  leave 
the  Church.  The  arguments  on  both  sides  were  dis- 
cussed for  several  days,  and  at  length  we  agreed  with- 
out a  dissenting  voice  '  It  is  by  no  means  expedient 
that  the  Methodists  should  leave  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land.' Nevertheless  the  same  leaven  continued  to 
work  in  various  parts  of  the  kingdom." 

In  1778  he  says  again  : — 

"  The  original  Methodists  are  all  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  the  more  awakened  they  were  the  more 
zealously  they  adhered  to  it  in  every  point  both  of 
doctrine  and  discipline.  Hence  we  inserted  in  the 
first  Rules  of  our  Society  '  they  that  leave  the  Church, 
leave  us.'  And  this  we  did,  not  as  a  point  of  pru- 
dence, but  a  point  of  conscience." 

He  died  March  2,  1791,  and  in  1789,  two  years 
before  his  death,  he  said : — 

"  I  never  had  any  design  of  separating  from  the 
Church ;  I  have  no  such  design  now.  I  do  not  be- 
lieve that  the  Methodists  in  general  design  it  when  I 
am  no  more  seen.  I  do,  and  will  do  all  that  is  in  my 
power  to  prevent  such  an  event.  Nevertheless  in 
spite  of  all  1  can  do  many  will  separate  from  it. 

"In  ilat  opposition  to  these  I  declare  once  more 
that  I  live  and  die  a  member  of  the  Church  of  E lig- 
ht ml,  and  that  none  who  regard  my  judgment  or  ad- 
vice will  ever  separate  from  it." 

In  his  sermon  preached  at  Cork,  about  the  same 
time,  he  declared  to  the,  preachers  in  his  connection 
that  they  had  no  right  to  baptize  and  administer  the 


190  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  His  design  was  to 
improve  the  state  of  religion  in  the  Church.  But,  as 
he  said,  he  did  not  dare  to  leave  the  Church,  and  on 
the  Minutes  of  the  Conference,  in  1770,  he  had  these 
emphatic  words  entered  :  "  Let  this  be  well  observ- 
ed— I  fear  when  the  Methodists  leave  the  Church,  God 
will  leave  them." 

The  Methodists  claim  1,068,525  members,  and 
7,730  local  preachers. 

The  §  36.  Like  that  of  the  Mennonities  and 

Moravians.  Baptists,  the  history  of  this  sect  is  involved 
in  a  great  deal  of  obscurity.  Like  them  too,  the 
Moravians  refer  to,  and  make  use  of  the  "Waldenses,  or 
Albigenses.  From  an  article  in  Rupp's  Collection, 
which  has  the  sanction  of  the  Board  of  the  Moravian 
church,  I  make  the  following  abridgement  : — 

"United  Brethren,  or  Unitas  Fratrum,  or  some- 
times called  Moravians,  were  originally  founded  by 
the  descendants  of  the  Bohemian  and  Moravian 
Brethren,  who  being  persecuted  for  their  religious 
tenets  and  non-conformity  in  their  native  country, 
founded  a  colony  under  the  patronage  of  Count  Zinzen- 
dorf,  on  an  estate  of  his  called  Berthelsdorf,  in  Upper 
Lusatia,  in  the  year  1722,  to  which  colony  the  name 
of  '  Hernnhut  '  was  given.  No  bond  of  union,  how- 
ever, existed  for  some  time.  But  after  a  while,  under 
the  guidance  of  Count  Zinzendorf,  who  from  an  early 
age  had  entertained  an  idea  of  constituting  a  Chris- 
tian community,  on  the  model  of  the  primitive  apos- 
tolic congregations,  certain  articles  of  union  were  pro- 
posed among  them.  All  the  inhabitants  of  Hernnhut, 
after  mature  consideration  adopted   this  scheme,  and 


V.J  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN  SECTS.  191 

these  statutes  by  the  name  of  a  brotherly  agreement, 
and  pledged  themselves  mutually  to  its  observance  in 
the  year  1727,  and  thus  formed  the  first  stock  of  the 
present  Society  of  United  Brethren.  Count  Zinzen- 
dorf  was  justly  in  some  measure  considered  the  founder 
of  the  society.  Individuals  from  the  Protestant  de- 
nominations were  from  the  beginning  admitted  among 
them  without  renouncing  their  original  church  and 
creed.  '  The  United  Brethren  continue  strenuously 
to  object  to  being  considered  a  separate  sect  or  denomi- 
nation, because  their  union  is  exclusively  founded  on 
general  Chrstian  doctrines,  and  their  peculiarities  relate 
solely  to  their  social  organization.''  Still,  however, 
when  called  upon  to  point  out  their  creed,  they  profess 
a  general  adherence  to  the  Confession  of  Augsburg. 
The  society  early  undertook  to  propagate  the  Gospel 
among  the  heathen  nations.  In  the  prosecution  of  their 
object,  they  planted  colonies  in  different  parts  of  Ger- 
many, England,  Holland,  America,  &c,  all  of  which 
together  now  constitute  the  Unity  of  the  Brethren. 
K.M'h  local  congregation  is  responsible  to  the  General 
Board  of  the  Directors  at  present  seated  at  Berthelsdorf 
near  Hernnhut." 

137.  It  does  not  appear  from  the  above  The "u,lity." 

•  i     •  ,  regarded  by  its 

account  that  the  Moravians  claim  to   be  a  Founders, 
church  at  all.   They  call  their  society  merely  r,lther  M  a 

J  j  j    social  than  an 

"a  social  organization)"  and  Bay  "it  would  FrrimitMtirai 

be  preposterous  to  conceive  that  the  peculiar    °(y' 
views  or  regulations  of  a  society  such  as  that  of  the 
United    Brethren   could  ever  he  adopted  hy  any  lar 
body  of  men."      And    yel    they   undertake   to  perform 
the    functions    of    a    church.       Tiny    administer     the 


192  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  ]Chap 

sacraments — exercise  jurisdiction  and  discipline,  and 

preach  the  G-ospel  to  the  heathen  for  their  conversion. 

k  38.  Although  the  foregoing  statements 

Another  °  . 

account  of  are  copied  from  a  document  which  had  the 
their  origin.  approbation  of  t^e  Board,  I  cannot  but  think 

that  it  comes  short  of  what  is  claimed  for  them.     I 
have  before  me  another  account  as  follows  : 

"  They  derive  their  origin  from  the  Grreek  Church 
in  the  ninth  century,  when  by  the  instrumentality  of 
Methodius  and  Cyrillus,  two  Greek  monks,  the  kings 
of  Bulgaria  and  Moravia  being  converted  to  the  Faith 
were,  together  with  their  subjects,  united  in  com- 
munion with  the  Grreek  Church.  Methodius  was  their 
first  Bishop,  and  for  their  use  Cyril lus  translated  the 
Scriptures  into  the  Sclavonian  language.  The  greater 
part  of  the  members  in  process  of  time  were  compelled 
to  submit  to  the  See  of  Rome.  A  few  of  them  joined 
the  Waldenses  in  1170,  and  became  identified  with 
them.  From  this  union  of  the  Bohemian  seceders  and 
the  Waldenses,  arose  the  sect  of  Moravians" 

The  Moravians  are  Episcopalians.  In  1467  three 
of  their  preachers  were  ordained  bishops  by  a  Wal- 
densian  Bishop  in  Austria  by  the  name  of  Stephen. 
These  on  their  return  ordained  ten  other  bishops.  This 
occurred  in  Bohemia  where  the  Church  was  already 
established,  and  consequently  this  step  was  the  organi- 
zation of  a  distinct  and  opposing  sect. 

Mosheim  savs : 

"  The  Bohemian  Brethren,  as  they  are  called,  or 
Moravians,  were  descended  from  the  better  sort  of 
Hussites,  and  that  at  the  Councils  of  Ostorg  1620,  and 
1627,  the  two  communities  of  Bohemians  and  Swiss 


V.J  ORIGIN    OF   MODERN    SECTS.  193 

[Hussites]  became  consolidated  into  one,  which  took 
the  name  of  the  church  of  the  United  Brethren,  and 
retained  the  form  and  regulations  of  the  Bohemians, 
but  embraced  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformed." — ( Cent. 
xvi.  sec.  iii.  Pt.  ii.  c.  11,  h  23.) 

§  39.    Notwithstanding   all    this   uncer-        The 
tainty  and  diversity  of  opinion  and  statement  Mo?&Z!&*a 

J  J  r  undoubtedly, 

concerning  their  origin,  there  is  no  uncer- however,  a 

,,   ■  _  .  .  .  .  Sectoutsideof 

tain  y  about  the  main  point  ol  our  inquiry,  the  church. 
to  wit,  that  the  Moravians  are  a  sect  outside 
of  the  visible  Society  which  has  existed  ever  since  the 
Ascension  of  our  Lord. 

It  is  pretty  certain  that  Moravia  had  been  (imper- 
fectly no  doubt)  converted,  in  a  great  measure,  before 
Methodius  and  Cyrillus,  the  Greek  Monks,  went  there, 
and  that  too  by  missionaries  in  the  Roman  Obedience. 
At  all  events,  the  Church  in  Moravia  was  soon  brought 
into  the  Roman  Obedience,  and  the  few  seceders  only 
who  joined  the  Waldenses  enter  in  as  an  element 
towards  making  up  the  modern  sect  of  the  Moravians. 

We  have  already  seen  who  and  what  the  people 
called  Waldensians  were.  The  Hussites  were  also  a 
sect  of  seceders  (probably  from  the  Diocese  of  Con- 
stance in  Switzerland)  whom  Huss  bad  gathered 
around  him.  None  of  these  things  can  give  ecclesias- 
tic;! I  character  to  them  as  a  part  of  Christ's  visible 
Church.  They  make  no  claim  to  such  a  position  in 
the  sense  in  which  we  are  using  the  words,  i.  e.  to 
denote  the  visible  society  which  has  existed  since  His 
day. 

It  would    certainly   bo   strange    if  we  are    called 
upon  to  allow  to  the  Moravians  what  they  do  not  claim 
9 


194  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

for  themselves.  We  have  seen  that  in  the  Document 
written  by  one  of  their  bishops,  Schweinitz,  and  "  sanc- 
tioned by  the  Board  of  the  Moravian  church,"  they 
do  not  even  claim  to  be  considered  a  church  at  all,  but 
only  "  a  social  organization  "  in  which  each  individual 
can  have  certain  facilities  for  leading  a  Christian  life. 
But  it  will  not  altogether  answer  to  take  them  at  their 
word  ;  for  they  are  regarded  as  a  church  by  others,  if 
not  by  themselves,  and  they  perform  all  the  functions 
of  a  church.  But  yet  as  a  church  they  do  not  claim 
to  have  been  a  part  of  that  Church  which  was  insti- 
tuted in  the  Apostles'  days  and  continued  its  visible 
existence  down  even  unto  the  time  of  the  origin  of  the 
Moravians.  But,  on  the  contrary,  they  claim,  as  one 
great  point  of  their  merit,  that  they  arose  for  the  pur- 
pose of  opposing  the  errors  and  corruptions  of  that 
Church.  It  would  therefore  be  doing  violence  to  all 
use  of  language  and  all  notions  of  identity,  no  less 
than  gross  injustice  to  them,  to  say  that  they  were  that 
very  Church,  or  a  part  of  it,  which  they  organized 
themselves  only  or  chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  opposing. 
Their  right  to  become  a  church  is  another  question, 
and  one  which  we  neither  deny  nor  discuss  in  this 
place.  But  the  fact  that,  as  a  church,  they  are  dis- 
tinct from,  and  not  the  same  as  the  Church  which  had 
long  been  established  where  they  originated,  and  was 
then  in  the  Roman  Obedience,  the  corruptions  of  which 
they  arose  to  deny  and  protest  against,  is  all  that  we 
are  now  seeking  to  ascertain. 

The  Moravians  claim  in  this  country  about  6,000 
people,  22  congregations,  24  clergymen,  two  of  them 
bishops. 


V.J  ORIGIN   OF  MODERN   SECTS.  195 

§  40.  We  now  come  to  the  last  in  our  lis         The 

Presbyterians. 

of  the   Primary   Sects.      I  shall  take   my 
account  of  the  Presbyterians  chiefly  from  the  article 
of  Dr.  Krebs,  Permanent  Clerk  of  the  General  As- 
sembly, in  Rupp's  Collection. 

"  The  Presbyterian  church  in  the  United  States 
derives  its  lineage  from  the  Presbyterians  both  in  Ire- 
land and  Scotland.  It  is  true  that  Presbyterianism 
was  the  form  not  only  of  the  church  of  Scotland,  but 
also  of  the  Reformed  churches  on  the  continent  of 
Europe,  and  indeed  of  the  Puritans  of  England  about 
the  time  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  [1643 ;]  and 
contributions  from  all  these  sources  have  been  made  at 
various  times  to  the  elements  of  the  American  Presby- 
terian church.  But  still  it  is  unquestionable  that  the 
early  founders  of  this  church  were  principally  Scotcft 
and  Irish  Presbyterians. 

"  In  like  manner,  the  church  of  Scotland  was  more 
than  any  other,  their  model  in  the  whole  arrangement 
of  their  judicatories,  and  in  their  whole  ecclesiastical 
nomenclature,  with  few  exceptions.  And  on  this 
account  the  Presbyterian  church  in  this  country  has 
always  been  popularly  and  appropriately  regarded  as 
the  daughter,  more  especially  of  the  church  of  Scot- 
land." 

We  have  already  examined,  so  far  as  our  present 
undertaking  requires,  the  ecclesiastical  position  ot 
those  who  came  1«>  this  country  as  "elements  to  the 
American  Presbyterian  church,"  from  "the Iteformeil 
churches  on  the  Continent,"  and  after  giving  an  ao- 
count  of  its  establishment  bere,  we  will  proceed  to 
an  account  of  those  thai  oarne  from  Scotland. 


196  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

.  The  primary  ecclesiastical  union  of  the  American 
Presbyterians  occurred  in  1706,  when  the  Presbytery 
of  Philadelphia  was  founded.  At  the  meeting  of  the 
Synod  in  1721,  there  was  made  a  declaration  that  the 
Presbyterians  in  America  had  exercised  the  Presbyte- 
rian government  and  discipline  according  to  the  prac- 
tice of  '  the  best  reformed  churches,'  as  far  as  the 
nature  and  constitution  of  this  country  would  allow. 
In  1728,  an  overture  was  presented  to  the  Synod  of 
Philadelphia  respecting  subscription  to  the  confession 
of  Faith  and  Catechisms,  &c. 

"  Although  the  Westminster  Assembly's  Confession 
of  Faith  and  Catechisms  '  always  had  been  the  only 
standard  of  faith,  rites,  government  and  discipline,' 
yet  the  Book  itself  had  never  been  formally  announced 
as  the  Creed  and  Directory  of  the  American  Presby- 
terians. In  the  next  year  this  Book  was  adopted. 
The  first  General  Assembly  met  in  1789." 

Dr.  Miller,  of  Princeton  Theological  Seminary, 
N.  J.,  who  is  perhaps  the  highest  individual  authority 
in  the  case,  thus  begins  his  article  on  the  Presbyterian 
church  in  the  United  States,  in  the  "  Encyclopedia  of 
Religious  Knowledge,"  p.  966  : 

"  This  denomination  is  to  be  considered  as  the 
offspring  of  the  church  of  Scotland." 

Our  attention  is,  therefore,  in  the  first  place,  chiefly 
directed  to  Scotland. 

k  41.  The  Church  of  Scotland  was  brought 

The  ° 

Reformation  into  the  Roman  Obedience  about  the  begin- 
ning of  the  twelfth  century,  and  so  continued 
until  the  sixteenth.      In    1555,   John   Knox,  who  is 
regarded  as  the  great  Scotch  Reformer,  returned  from 


V.J  ORIGIN    OF   MODERN    SECTS.  197 

Geneva,  in  Switzerland,  and  added  great  vigor  to  the 
reformation  which  had  already  been  begun.  The 
Bishops  and  ecclesiastical  authorities  generally  opposed 
the  movement.  The  contest  was  carried  on,  on  both 
sides,  in  a  most  unjustifiable  spirit.  The  civil  authori- 
ties were  called  into  requisition  by  both  parties,  as  it 
was  found  possible  to  make  use  of  them.  In  1558, 
the  reforming  party  in  the  Parliament  described  them- 
selves as  "  the  Nobility  and  Commons  of  the  Pro- 
testants of  the  Church  of  Scotland"1  In  1560,  the 
Parliament  published  by  their  authority,  "  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith  professed  and  believed  by  the  Pro- 
testants within  the  realm  of  Scotland."  This  Confes- 
sion was  confirmed  by  the  three  estates  in  Parliament 
on  the  17th  of  August,  and  on  the  24th  of  the  same 
month,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Pope  was  abolished  by 
the  same  authority.  The  Bishops  and  Clergy  who 
were  in  Parliament  seem  to  have  acquiesced  in  this 
proceeding,  though  they  did  not  approve  of  it.  They 
lived  and  died  for  the  most  part  Papists.  On  the  20th 
of  December  in  the  same  year,  "  the  Protestants  of 
the  Church  of  Scotland "  held  their  first  General 
Assembly.  It  consisted  of  forty -six  persons,  of  whom 
Knox  was  the  principal.  They  commenced  operations 
as  an  organized  sect  about  this  time,  being  as  yet,  of 
course,  only  a  small  minority,  and  in  opposition  to  the 
Church  and  its  Clergy  generally. 

Thus  things  went  on;  tin-  Protestants  gaining  in 

numbers  and  influence.      Some  of  the    Bishops    joined 

i   Lawson's  Hist,  of  the  h)>isc<>j,<il    Church  <>f  Scotlmtd  />">"  the    He- 
f'li/httionto  the  JiToli/tion,   j>.   11. 


198  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

them — as  for  instance,  the  Bishops  of  Galloway,  Ork- 
ney, Caithness  and  Argyll.  Some  of  the  Bishoprics 
soon  became  vacant  by  death  or  otherwise,  and  in 
1572,  a  Convocation  was  held  at  Leith  in  which  some 
very  important  steps  were  taken.  It  was  not  thought 
expedient,  however,  to  alter  the  titles  of  the  Archbish- 
ops and  Bishops,  nor  the  bounds  of  the  Dioceses,  but 
rather  that  they  stand  and  continue  as  before  the  Re- 
formation. Some  of  the  old  Bishops  had  conformed, 
and  the  places  of  the  others  were  now  filled,  but  with- 
out regular  and  canonical  ordination,  with  Protestants. 
This  constituted  what  was  called  a  Tulchan  Epis- 
copacy— a  term  derived,  as  Lawson  says,  from  a  prac- 
tice then  prevalent,  of  stuffing  a  calfs  skin  with 
straw,  and  placing  it  before  a  cow,  to  induce  the  ani- 
mal to  give  milk,  which  figure  was  called  a  "  tulch- 
an " — a  term  derived  from  a  word  signifying  a  model, 
or  close  resemblance. 

From  this  time  [1572]  the  Clergy  in  the  Roman 
Obedience  ceased  to  claim  or  exercise  jurisdiction  or 
ministerial  functions  in  the  Church  of  Scotland. 

This'  Tulchan1  Episcopacy  continued  until  1610. 
In  1607,  James  I.,  King  of  England,  and  YIth  of 
Scotland,  summoned  a  General  Assembly  of  the 
Scotch  Church  to  be  held  at  Dundee  on  the  24th  of 
November.  Each  of  the  Presbyteries  were  required  to 
send  "  two  of  the  most  godly,  peaceable,  wise  and 
grave  "  of  their  number,  as  their  representatives.  A 
Conference  was  also  held  at  Falkland,  in  Fife,  in  June 
1608,  and  a  General  Assembly  again  in  Dundee,  on 
the  26th  of  July  the  same  year.  In  all  these  meet- 
ings, progress  was  made  towards  the  settlement  of  the 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  199 

state  of  affairs  in  the  Church,  in  a  more  satisfactory 
manner.  In  1610,  three  of  those  persons  who  were 
actually  in  possession  of  the  Sees,  or  had  been  nomi- 
nated to  those  that  were  vacant,  Spottiswoode,  of 
Glasgow,  Lamb,  of  Brechin,  and  Hamilton,  of  Gal- 
loway, went  to  London,  and  were  ordained  Bishops  by 
the  Bishops  of  the  English  Church.  They  returned 
home  and  consecrated  the  others,  who  either  were  in 
possession  of,  or  had  been  appointed  to  the  vacant  Sees. 
Thus  the  Church  became  again,  in  fact,  as  well  as 
in  name  and  form,  Episcopal. 

In  1574  Andrew  Melville  returned  from  a  ten 
years'  residence  in  Geneva,  and  if  he  was  not  the  first 
to  introduce  a  preference  for  the  Presbyterian  form  of 
church  government,  he  certainly  added  great  vigor  to 
the  zeal  of  those  who  entertained  such  a  preference.1 
His  party  continued  to  increase  until  1637,  when  they 
combined  and  drove  those  of  the  Episcopal  Clergy, 
who  would  not  submit  to  the  Presbyterian  rule,  out  of 
their  places  in  the  Church. 

The  establishment  of  Presbyterianism  at  this 
period)  was  no  act  of  the  Church.  The  General  Assem- 
bly— which  met  at  Glasgow,  Nov.  17,  1638 — consist- 
ed, according  to  the  laws  of  the  Church  and  the 
Realm,  of  the  King's  Commissioner,  (at  that  time  the 
Marquis  of  Hamilton,)  the  Bishops,  and  inferior  clergy 
and  laity  as  hrl.-irates.  The  King's  Commissioner 
was  acknowledged  to  have  the  right  to  dissolve  the 
Assembly.  Suoh  an  Assembly  was  the  highest  eoole- 
siastieal  authority  in   Scotland,  and   the  only  one  that 

1  Lawson's  Hint.,  as  before,  p  LSI. 


200  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

could  make  any  change  or  regulation  of  any  kind  in 
the  Church.  But  on  the  21st  of  November,  before  any 
business  had  been  transacted,  the  Bishops  protested 
against  the  Assembly  and  refused  to  have  anything  to 
do  with  it,  on  the  ground  of  illegality  in  the  election 
of  the  Deputies,  and  for  other  reasons.  This  protest  or 
"  Declinature "  as  it  was  called,  occasioned  a  good 
deal  of  discussion — the  Marquis  taking  sides  with  the 
Bishops.  On  the  29th  he  dissolved  the  Assembly  and 
withdrew.  Episcopacy  was  abolished  and  Presbyte- 
rianism  established  by  this  remainder  of  a  G-eneral 
Assembly — after  the  Protest  or  Declinature  of  the 
Bishops — after  the  withdrawal  of  the  Lord  High  Com- 
missioner— and  after,  therefore,  the  Dissolution  of  the 
Assembly  by  what  it  had  hitherto  acknowledged  a 
competent  authority,  and  according  to  its  own  rules 
and  laws.1 

But  on  the  Restoration  of  King  Charles  II.  to  the 
throne  of  England,  in  1660,  steps  were  taken  to  bring 
back  those  of  the  Episcopal  Clergy  that,  survived,  to 
their  places  in  the  Church  in  Scotland,  as  well  as  in 
England.  On  the  15th  of  December,  1661,  four  per- 
sons were  consecrated,  for  the  Scottish  Sees,  and  they, 
on  their  return  home,  filled  up  by  consecration  the 
other  Sees  as  before  1637.  Sydserf,  of  Galloway,  the 
only  Scotch  Bishop  that  survived  the  Rebellion  and 
remained  faithful  to  the  Church,  was  transferred  to 
the  See  of  Orkney.  The  four  new  Bisshops  were  James 
Sharp,  Archbishop  of  St.  Andrews,  Andrew  Fair  foul, 
Archbishop  of  Glasgow,  James  Hamilton,  Bishop  of 
Galloway,  and  Robert  Leighton,  for   Dumblane. 

1  Lawsont,  pp.  571 — 690. 


V.J  ORIGIN    OF    MODERN    SECTS.  201 

Thus  again  was  Episcopacy  restored  to  the  Church 
of  Scotland.  It  appears  from  the  testimony  of  the 
Earl  of  Grlencairne,  that  the  Episcopalians  were  six  to 
one  in  point  of  numbers  at  this  time.1  The  Presbyte- 
rians, who  were  now  excluded  from  its  ministry  and 
its  Churches,  many  of  them  settled  in  Ireland,  some 
came  to  America,  and  many  remained  at  home  as  a 
sect  in  opposition  to  the  Church. 

§  A2.  But  the  act  which  has  led  the  The  Legal 
Presbyterians  in  this  country  to  call  the  0^  p^y! 
Presbyterians  in  Scotland   "the    Church  0/  terians,  a9  the 

J  "Church  of 

Scotland"  is  of  a  subsequent  date,  and  re-  Scotland." 
mains  yet  to  be  related. 

In  1688,  occurred  a  change  in  the  English  Dy- 
nasty. James  II.,  the  last  of  the  line  of  the  Stuarts, 
left  the  kingdom,  and  William,  Prince  of  Orange,  the 
husband  of  the  eldest  daughter  of  the  King,  came  to 
ill.-  Throne.  James,  however,  had  a  son,  who,  accord- 
ing  to  the  laws  of  England,  and  the  oaths  of  all  in 
office  in  the  realm,  was  the  legitimate  heir  to  the 
crown.  The  Scotch  Bishops  and  clergy  generally, 
adhered  to  James  and  his  son.  The  Presbyterians,  on 
the  other  hand,  readily  yielded  their  support  to 
William.  In  an  interview  between  Compton,  Bishop 
of  London,  and  Rose,  Bishop  of  Edinburg,  Compton 
said  to  Hose  that  William  was  satisfied  that  "the 
great  body  of  the.  oobilityand  gentry  of  Scotland  were 
foi  Episcopacy,  and  thai  he  had  directed  him  [Coirrp- 
ton]  to  say  ihat  it*  the  Episcopalians  of  Scotland 
would  undertake  to  Berve  him  to  the  purpose  that  ho 

1  L.v  a  lOH,  |»  •'»"  1. 

9* 


202  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

is  served  in  England,  he  would  take  them  by  the  hand, 
support  the  Church  and  order,  and  throw  off  the 
Presbyterians."  x 

The  Presbyterians  had  kept  alive  their  animosities 
towards  the  Church,  from  the  time  of  Melville's  re- 
turn. Their  feelings  had  been  much  embittered  by 
the  proceedings  of  the  Churchmen,  at  and  after  the 
Restoration :  and  they  were  ready  to  avail  themselves 
of  any  advantage  in  their  favor  that  might  present 
itself.  William,  after  his  recognition  as  king,  took 
the  revenues  of  the  Scotch  Bishops  and  put  them  into 
his  pocket,  by  an  order  published  October  19,  1689.Q 
Ever  since  that  time  these  revenues  have  been  paid 
into  the  Royal  Exchequer.3  An  act,  passed  in  the 
Scotch  Parliament  through  the  King's  influence,  on 
the  24th  of  April,  1690,  gave  to  the  Presbyterian 
Seceders  the  possession  and  control  of  the  Church 
edifices  and  property ;  and  on  the  7th  of  June  follow- 
ing, the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith  was  declared, 
by  the  same  authority,  to  be  the  allowed  and  estab- 
lished Confession  of  Faith  in  Scotland,  and  "the 
Presbyterian  church-government  and  Discipline  "  "  es- 
tablished, ratified  and  confirmed."4 

The  Bishops  and  Clergy,  however,  refused  com- 
pliance, and  continued  their  ministrations  entirely 
distinct  from  the  Presbyterians,  as  far  as  the  tyranny 

1  Lathbury's  Hist,  of  the  Non  Jurors,  p.  416,  where  this  testimony  as 
to  the  comparative  numbers,  <fec,  of  the  Churchmen  and  the  Presbyte- 
rians is  abundantly  sustained. 

3  Lawson's  Hist,  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  since  the  Revolution, 
p.  100. 

3  Lawson's  Hist,  of  the  Ch.  of  Scotland,  pp.  103-105.    4  Ibid.  p.  29. 


V.]  ORIGIN  OF   MODERN   SECTS.  203 

of  the  laws  and  the  violence  of  Presbyterian  intolerance 
would  permit.  A  large  portion  of  the  people  still 
adhered  to  their  communion — and  thus  the  identity  of 
the  Church  of  Scotland  was  preserved  by  them,  not- 
withstanding the  dis-establishment  by  the  secular 
authorities,  and  the  violence  that  was  brought  to  bear 
against  it. 

§  43.  Now  this  mere  legal  establishment     This  Le^ 

#  Establishment 

of  a  Sect  could  not  make  it  a  different  body  did  not  change 
ecclesiastically  from  what  it  had  been  before  ;  tJ»e,dentlty°f 

J  '  the  Church. 

and  though  the  title  which  belonged  to  the 

Church  was  given  to  the  Sect,  this  fact  did  not  change 

the  identity  of  either  body. 

Thus  we  have  several  distinct  periods  in  the  history 
of  the  Scotch  Church — (1.)  from  1560,  the  rejection  of 
the  Papal  Supremacy,  to  1572,  the  commencement  of 
the  Tulchan  Episcopacy— (2.)  from  1572  to  1610,  the 
first  consecration  of  Bishops  in  England  for  the  Scotch 
Sees — (3.)  from  1610  to  1638,  when  the  illegal  As- 
sembly of  Glasgow  pretended  to  establish  Presbyte- 
rian ism  in  the  Church — (4.)  from  1638  to  1661,  when 
Episcopaoy  was  again  recognized  by  law  as  the  right- 
ful government  in  the  Church — (5.)  from  1661  to 
1689,  when  the  Church  property  was  transferred  by 
King  and  Parliament  into  the  bands  of  the  Presbyte- 
rians, and  they  were  constituted  the  "Established 
Church." 

Thus  the  Scotch  Church,  properly  so  called,  was 
never  Presbyterian  in  its  form  of  government. 

"  The  lirM  Presbyterian  church  thai  was  organized 
and  furnished  with  a  place  of  worship  in  this  country," 

says    Dr.    MlLLBR,    "was    about    170^."      Their    iii-i 


204  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

presbytery  was  organized  in  1704.  But  neither  the 
Church  ot  Scotland,  nor  the  Sect  which  is  by  law 
entitled  to  that  name,  appear  to  have  had  anything  to 
do  with  it.  The  agents  in  its  formation  were  indeed 
chiefly  of  Scotch  descent.  But  they  were  neither 
members  of  the  Scotch  Church  when  they  came  to 
this  country,  nor  admitted  to  its  communion  after- 
wards. And,  in  point  of  fact  they  were  as  completely 
seceders  from  the  Scotch  Establishment,  [Presbyte- 
rian,] as  they  were  from  the  Scotch  Church  properly 
so  called. 

ThePresby-  *  44.  When,  therefore,  the  Presbyterians 
terian  church  sav  that  the  Presbyterian  church  in  America 
Iry,  not  esteb-  was  founded  by  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
hshed  by  the  ^       mean  that  it  was  founded  by  the  Pres- 

Chuich         of  J  .  .  '  . 

Scotland,  pro-  by  terian  Sect,  which  since  their  establisn- 

perly  so  called.  ^^    ^    ^     ^^  have    been    ^^  „  ^ 

Church  of  Scotland." 

It  is  not  true,  therefore,  in  the  sense  required  by 
the  essential  principles  of  the  identity  of  the  Church, 
that  the  Presbyterian  church  in  this  country  was  es- 
tablished by  the  Church  of  Scotland — but  it  was 
established  by  Presbyterians  seceding  from  the  Church 
of  Scotland,  for  the  purpose  of  founding  a  church  dif- 
ferent from  that,  and  on  an  entirely  different  basis. 

The  Irish  $  45.  If  we  turn  our  attention  to  Ireland, 
wholmTto  we  find  the  same  general  state  of  facts.  In 
this  country,  1537^  the  Papal  jurisdiction  was   abolished 

Suci  ders  from  .  .  ~ ,  , 

the  Irish  by  Parliament,  and  the  Bishops,  Clergy,  and 
church.  whole  Church  generally  assented  to  thfc  Re- 
formation. In  the  reign  of  Mary,  the  Papist,  five  of 
the  Irish  Bishops  who  would  not  conform  to  the   Ro- 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  205 

ft 

man  Obedience,  were  expelled  from  their  Sees.  When, 
in  1550,  the  Reformation  was  restored,  seventeen  out 
of  nineteen  Bishops  in  Parliament  approved  it,  and  the 
rest  of  the  Bishops  and  clergy  generally,  as  well  as 
the  people  acquiesced.  But  Presbyterianism  was 
never  established  in  the  Church  in  Ireland.  The 
Presbyterians  were  always,  whenever  there  were  any, 
seceders  from  the  Church,  so  confessedly  and  nomi- 
nally, as  well  as  in  fact. 

$  46.   When  the  Presbyterians  gained  the      The  Plin" 

J  a  ciplea    of  the 

ascendancy  in  the  English  Parliament,  1643,  presbyteriana 
they  appointed  the  famous  Westminster  As-  ^th  regard  to 

*/rr  Separation 

sembly  of  Divines — to  provide  for  a  change  from  the 
in  religion.  In  consequence,  Episcopacy 
and  the  Prayer  Book  were  abolished — so  far  as  the 
authority  of  Parliament  could  effect  such  a  result, 
and  Presbyterianism  established  instead.  The  Inde- 
pendents petitioned  for  toleration,  and  a  correspon- 
dence ensued.  From  the  Presbyterian  replies,  as 
given  in  "  Collier's  Church  History  of  Great 
Britain,"  (Vol.  VIII.,  p.  297—302,)  I  make  the  follow- 
ing quotations : — 

u  That  the  toleration  which  the  Independents  asked 
could  not  be  granted,  as  it  would  '  be  licensing  perpet- 
ual division  in  the  Church;'  that  'the  request  sup- 
poses  the  lawfulness  of  gathering  churches  out  of 
true  Churches — in  countenance  of  which  there  is  not 
the  least  example  in  all  tin-  Holy  Scriptures,5  ih.it  'if 
the  Church  requires  thai  which  is  evil  of  any  member, 
he  iiiu-i  forbear  compliance,  but  yd  without  separa- 
tion,' 'that,  though  tenderness  of  oonsoienoe  may 
oblige  to  forbear  or  Buspend  the  aol  of  communion  in  ;i 


206  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

case  scrupled  and  supposed  unlawful ;  yet  it  does  not 
bind  people  to  a  practice  repugnant  to  the  will  of  God  ; 
of  which  kind  they  -conceive  the  gathering  separate 
churches  out  of  true  churches  to  be  an  instance;  that 
'  the  notion  of  separation  is  not  to  be  determined  by 
the  civil  legislature,  nor  by  acts  of  State,  but  by 
the  word  of  God,'  '  the  same  ground  of  separation  may 
be  plead  by  any  erroneous  conscience  whatever,  and 
thus  by  the  same  equity  and  parity  of  reasoning  the 
Church  may  be  broken  into  as  many  subdivisions  as 
there  are  different  scruples  in  the  minds  of  men,'  'and 
in  this  new  shelter,  the  same  danger  may  be  appre- 
hended, and  carry  the  scrupling  persons  to  a  further 
distance.  And  are  these  subdivisions  and  fractions  in 
church  government  as  lawful  as  they  may  be  infinite  ? 
Or  must  we  give  that  regard  to  erroneous  consciences 
as  to  satisfy  men's  scruples  by  so  unbounded  a  liberty  ? 
Does  not  this  plainly  import  that  error  in  conscience 
is  a  protection  against  [the  guilt  of]  schism.'  '  Scru- 
ple of  conscience  is  no  good  plea  against  the  charge  of 
schism,  the  motives  must  have  more  weight  in  them.' " 

Such  is  the  language  used,  and  the  views  held  by 
the  men  who  composed  the  Westminster  Assembly — 
of  whose  Confession  of  Faith  and  Catechism^  Dr. 
Krebs,  "  Permanent  Clerk"  &c,  says  that  they  "  al- 
ways have  been  the  only  standard  [!]  of  Faith,  Rites, 
Government  and  Discipline  of  the  Presbyterians  of 
this  country." 

I  do  not  intend  to  adopt  this  language  altogether — 
or  to  make  an  indiscriminate  application  of  it.  But  it 
states  with  great  plainness  several  points — (1.)  that 
the   Scriptures  do  not   allow  of  the   gathering  of  a 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  207 

church  out  of  one  that  is  already  established,  that  is, 
establishing  a  second,  where  there  is  already  one — 
(2.)  that  the  civil  authority  or  "  acts  of  the  state  "  can 
give  no  authority  or  be  any  justification  for  so  doing, 
the  matter  being  exclusively  of  a  religious  character — 
(3.)  that  error  and  evil  in  a  Church  is  no  justification 
of  separation,  though  it  may  be  necessary  to  refuse 
compliance  in  particular  acts — (4.)  that  inasmuch  as 
conscience  may  be  erroneous  and  corrupt,  its  scruples 
alone  are  no  sufficient  plea  or  excuse  for  an  act  of  se- 
paration— and  (5.)  that  therefore,  there  can  be  no  justi- 
fication for  a  separation  from  a  Church  that  is  truly  a 
Branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 

Now  this  is  in  the  main,  sound  reasoning.  When 
the  Presbyterians  used  it,  they  supposed  they  occu- 
pied the  position  which  the  Church  of  England  now 
occupies — that  is,  the  position  of  a  valid  Branch  of  the 
Church,  historically  connected  with  the  past,  and 
which  could  be  identified  with  the  main  Body.  The 
reasoning  which  they  then  used  for  their  own  advan- 
tage, as  they  supposed,  if  it  were  now  turned  against 
them,  completely  cuts  off  their  claim. 

§  47.  In  considering  these  Sects,  I  have  rtfc    J*"" 

°  Observations 

avoided  a  statement  of  their  doctrines  and  on  aii  the  Pri- 
constitution  except  in  so  far  as  some  allusion  mury  *"* 
to  tin-in   came    in   incidentally.     But    of   them  all  it 

may  be  said  : — 

1.  Thai  no  one  of  them  has  the  Mini-try  which 
our  Lord  instituted,  continued  and  perpetuated  in  the 
way  which  has  always,  in  the  Church,  been  esteemed 
essential  to  its  identity. 

2.  That  no  on-'  of  them  is  based  upon  the  Creed  of 


208  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

the  Primitive  Church,  or  professes  to  hold  to  it  as 
their  Rule  of  Faith,  but  each  of  them  has  a  Rule  of  its 
own,  and  peculiar  to  itself. 

3.  That  they  all  have  been  organized  not  by,  or 
with  the  consent  and  approbation  of  the  Church  in 
which  their  founders  were  members,  but  always  and 
in  all  cases  within  the  jurisdiction  of  that  Church,  and 
in  opposition  to  its  laws  and  authority. 

4.  That  no  one  of  them  has  ever  been  recognized  as 
a  Branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ  by  any  Church  which 
has  existed  from  the  Apostle's  days,  or  any  that  has 
been  planted  by  such  an  Apostolic  Church.  But  they 
have  always  regarded  themselves,  and  have  been  re- 
garded by  others  as  constituting  a  communion,  or  per- 
haps several,  by  themselves,  which  has  arisen  into  be- 
ing since  the  commencement  of  the  Reformation. 

If  we  look,  however,  at  their  constitution,  we  shall 
find  that  two  of  them — the  Baptists  and  Congregation- 
alists — are  Congregational  in  their  form  of  Church 
organization  and  government ;  four,  namely,  the 
Dutch  Reformed,  the  Grerman  Reformed,  the  Luther- 
ans, and  the  Presbyterians,  are  Presbyterian ;  and 
three,  namely,  the  Mennonites,  the  Moravians,  and  the 
Methodists  are  Episcopal. 

Yet  neither  upon  these  facts,  nor  on  account  of  the 
Doctrines  which  they  teach,  or  the  Rules  of  Faith 
which  they  have  respectively  adopted,  do  I  call  them 
new  and  distinct  churches.  But  it  is  because  neither 
the  visible  existence  of  any  one  of  them,  nor  that  of 
any  church  which  owns  them  as  a  branch  of  itself, 
can  be  traced  back  to  an  origin  within  many  centuries 
of    the    foundation   of   the    Church  of    Christ,   or  is, 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  209 

in  its  origin,   identified    with   any   Branch    of    that 

Church. 

§  48.  I  have  no  disposition  to  call  in  ques-    The  Motive3 

r  '  of  the  Foun- 

tion  the  piety  or  motives  of  those  who  have  ders  of  these 
been  instrumental  in  laying  the  foundations  f6^'  *dmit" 

J       °  ted  to  have 

of  these  sects.  On  the  contrary  I  had  much  been  good, 
rather  dwell  upon  the  excuses  and  apologies 
for  their  error — which  are  to  be  found  in  the  times 
and  circumstances  of  their  lives.  The  abuses  and 
evils  in  the  Church  were  great,  and  the  influence  of 
the  preceding  centuries  had,  perhaps  on  the  whole, 
been  calculated  to  produce  views  of  the  organization 
and  discipline  of  the  Church,  more  completely  errone- 
ous than  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel.  The  re- 
formers of  whom  we  have  been  speaking  felt  deeply 
the  evils  under  which  they  were  suffering.  But  they 
saw  no  clear  and  satisfactory  way  of  escape.  Unlike 
the  English  Reformers,  the  Church  and  ecclesiastical 
authorities  with  which,  by  the  Providence  of  (rod, 
they  were  connected,  were  against  them.  They  con- 
sidered themselves  called  -upon  to  bear  their  testimony 
against  the  evils  and  corruptions  of  their  day.  In 
this  we  certainly  cannot  consider  them  in  the  wron<r. 
Ket  the  measure  was  almost  certain  to  lead  to  their 
excision  from  the  Church  by  its  constituted  authori- 
ties. And  it  is  now  impossible  to  say  what  might 
have  been  the  result  if  they  had  pursued  a  course  not 
less  firm  and  faithful,  but  more  meek  and  conciliatory. 

The   truth  has  a  power  and    vitality  of  its   own.  in  all 

oases.  But  religious  truth  is  especially  the  object  of 
Divine  care,  [f  they  had  simply  home  then-  testimony 
and  submitted  to  whatever  might   have  been  indicted 


210  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

upon  them,  the  good  seed  might,  and  probably  would 
have  taken  deeper  root,  and  sprung  up  to  a  more  wide 
spread  growth,  and  Germany,  instead  of  being,  as  it 
is,  overrun  with  pantheism,  rationalism,  and  infidelity, 
would  probably  have  presented  us  with  a  Protestant 
Church,  sound  in  the  faith,  unblameable  in  life,  and 
embracing  the  great  mass  of  the  population. 

But  to  human  foresight — for  man  sees  not  as  G-od 
seeth — it  seemed  that  without  some  association  or 
combination  amongst  themselves,  their  influence  would 
be  greatly  circumscribed,  and  perhaps  wholly  coun- 
teracted and  lost  to  the  world.  Therefore,  they 
organized  into  churches,  formed  rules  of  faith  for 
themselves,  and  undertook  to  perform  ecclesiastical 
functions.  But  still  as  we  have  seen,  they  felt  and 
confessed  their  ecclesiastical  deficiencies — they  ac- 
knowledged themselves  to  be  new  churches,  whose 
visible  existence  could  by  no  means  be  traced  back  to 
Christ  and  His  Apostles,  or  identified  with  the  Church 
then  established :  and  putting  their  trust  in  Him, 
whose  prerogative  it  is  to  bring  good  out  of  evil,  they 
relied  upon  the  necessities  of  the  case  for  their  justifi- 
cation in  what  they  were  doing. 

With  this,  however,  we  are  not  now  to  concern 
ourselves.  We  have  ascertained  the  fact  that  they 
are  not  parts  of  that  visible  and  continuous  Church 
which  Christ  and  the  Apostles  founded — this  they  did 
not  claim  to  be,  and  that  is  all  that  we  need  now  to 
ascertain  concerning  them. 

SECONDARY    SECTS. 

These,  it  will  be  remembered,  are  those  that  have 
split  off  from  one  of  the  Primary  Sects. 


V.l  ORIGIN  OF   MODERN   SECTS.  211 

$  49.  1.  Associate  Presbyterian  church      secessions 

from     the 
IN  NORTH  AMERICA.  Presbyterian 

This  is  a  branch  of  the  church  of  Scotland,  church- 
[the  Presbyterians]  and  holds  the  doctrines  of  the  West- 
minster Assembly.  It  was  formed  in  1733.  In  con- 
sequence of  the  recognition  of  the  Presbyterians  as  the 
Establishment  in  Scotland  by  William  and  Mary,  in 
3  688,  a  law  was  passed  in  1712,  giving  the  right  of 
patronage  and  presentmenlfto  lay  proprietors.  This  led 
to  a  secession  in  1733,  and  the  seceders  took  the  title 
above  written.  They  have  in  the  United  States  105 
ministers,  211  congregations,  13,477  communicants. — 
(Rev.  W.  I.  C  lei  and,  and  Rev.  James  P.  Miller.) 

2.  Reformed  Presbyterian  church. 

This  sect  also  is  formed  of  persons  who  seceded 
from  the  Scotch  Presbyterians  in  1688,  in  consequence 
of  their  consenting  to  become  the  Establishment,  and 
be  supported  by  law.  They  were  organized  into  a  sect 
in  this  country  in  1798.  They  have  about  30  minis- 
ters, 41  congregations — ( The  Rev.  John  N.  McLeod, 
D.  D.,  N.  Y.) 

3.  Associate  Reformed  church. 

Between  1660  and  1688,  a  large  number  [3,000 
Wodrow ,]of  Presbyterians  were  brought  to  this  country 
from  Scotland  and  sold  for  slaves,  chiefly  in  Virginia, 
Pennsylvania  and  New  Jersey.  The  fust  steps  towards 
organization  into  a  ohuroh  were  taken  in  L736  by  the 
Associate  Presbyterian  church,  Sret  In  1751  they 
received  a  minister  from  the  Reformed  Presbyterian 
church,  and  in  177  I  they  received  two  more.    In  1782 


212  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

they  became  a  fully  organized  sect.  Efforts  have 
been  made  to  unite  them  with  the  two  sects  just 
named,  derived  from  the  Scotch  Presbyterians,  but 
they  have  hitherto  been  unavailing.  They  have  about 
160  ministers,  and  260  congregations. — (Rev.  John 
Forsyth,  D  D.,  Professor  in  the  Seminary  at  New- 
burg,  New -York) 

4.  Cumberland  Presbyterians. 

This  sect  was  founded  in  1796,  by  the  Rev.  James 
McGrready.  It  originated  chiefly  in  an  effort  for  a 
revival  in  Kentucky.  It  resulted  in  the  formation  of 
the  sect  in  1802.  A  General  Assembly  was  formed 
in  1829.  They  have  13,  Synods,  and  57  Presbyteries 
— [350  ministers,  480  churches,  and  50,000  mem- 
bers.]— (Rev.  Dr.  Beard,  President  of  the  Cumberland 
College,  Princeton,  Ky.) 

5.  Presbyterians,  [New  School.] 

In  1837  there  was  a  division  effected  in  the  Pres- 
byterian church  in  this  country.  There  had  been  for 
a  long  time  a  difference  of  opinion  among  the  Pres- 
byterians, chiefly  in  regard  to  three  points,  "  human 
depravity,"  the  "  extent  of  the  atonement,"  and  "  the 
freedom  of  the  will."  The  party  taking  the  extreme 
views  on  these  points  attempted  to  enforce  them  upon 
the  others  in  1837.  The  more  liberal  party  seceded. 
They  also  claim  that  some  measures  contrary  to  the 
Constitution  of  the  General  Assembly  had  been  used 
in  favor  of  the  Old  School  views.  Thev  have  1,551 
ministers,  1,651  congregations,  155,000  members. — 
(The  Rev.  Dr.  Parker,  of  Philadelphia.) 


VVj  ORIGIN    OF   MODERN    SECTS.  213 

$  50.     1.  Freewill  Baptists.  secessions 

from  the  Baj>- 

This  connexion   was   founded   in  1780.  tists. 
The   first   Baptist    church    was    of   general 
views,  and  the  Baptists  in  several  of  the  States  were 
Armenian  long  before  the  Freewill  Baptist  connexion 
arose.     In  1780,  this  portion,  being  in  the  minority,  , 
seceded.     They   have  898  ministers,  1,057  churches, 
and  54,000  members. — (Rev.  Porter  S.  Burbank.) 

2.  Seventh-day  Baptists. 

In  1665,  a  Seventh-day  Baptist  came  from  Eng- 
land, and  in  1681  he  and  his  followers  came  to  an  open 
separation  from  the  Baptist  church  on  the  ground,  as 
their  name  indicates,  of  their  preferring  the  seventh 
day  of  the  week  for  their  Sabbath.  They  have  forty 
ordained  ministers,  50  churches,  6,000  members. — 
(Rev.  W.  B.  Gillett,  Pastor  of  the  Seventh-day  Bap- 
tist church,  Piscataway,  N.  J.) 

3.  Disciples  of  Christ. 

These  are  sometimes  called  'Reformed  Baptist' 
and  '  Campbell ites.'  This  sect  was  chiefly  founded 
by  Mr.  Thomas  Campbell,  who  had  been  a  minister  in 
the  "Secession"  branch  of  the  Scotch  Presbyterians. 
He  and  his  followers  were  baptized  again  by  immer- 
sion in  1812.  In  1813  they  were  received  into 
communion  with  the  regular  Baptists.  But  soon  after 
they  separated  again.  They  claim  about  200,000 
members. — (Rev.  R.  Richardson  of  Va.) 

$51.        1.     I J  I :  I  "i:  Mill)  Mr.MiM  TKS.  Secessi,.,, 

from   iln>   Me- 

This  sect  oommenoed  in  l^ll — whencer-  no»iu». 


214  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

tain  members  of  the  Menonite  connexion,  deploring 
the  general  decline  in  the  piety  of  their  sect  commenced 
a  reformation.  They  do  not  deem  themselves  at  lib- 
erty to  keep  an  accurate  account  of  their  members. 
— (Rev.  John  Herr,  Strasburg,  one  of  their  Bishops.) 

,2.  German  Baptists  or  Brethren. 

This  sect  are  often  called  "  Dunkers."  They  came 
to  this  country  from  Grermany  in  1718-1730. — (Rev. 
Philip  Boyle,  Uniontown,  Md.) 

3.  Seventh-day  Gterman  Baptists. 

This  sect  is  an  offshoot  from  the  foregoing  under 
the  leading  of  Conrad  Beissel,  in  1728. — (Dr.  Wm. 
H.  Fahnstock.) 

4.  Amish  or  Omish  church. 

This  is  a  sect  of  the  Menonites,  separated  from  the 
rest  chiefly  on  the  ground  of  being  more  strict  in  their 
dress  and  discipline.  They  have  about  5,000  mem- 
bers, and  are  sometimes  called  '  Hook  Menonites,' 
while  the  others  are  called  '  Button  Menonites.' — 
(Shem  Zook.) 

Secessions  $  52.    THE  CHURCH  OF   GrOD. 

ma"  Reform"-  In  1820,  the  Rev.  John  Winebrenner 
ed  church.  commenced  a  revival  in  Harrisburg,  Pa., 
which  extended  to  some  distance  around.  His 
movement  was  disapproved  by  the  Grerman  Re- 
formed authorities,  and  led  to  a  separation,  and  the 
formation  of  a  new  sect,  with  the  title  above  given. 
They  have  83  ministers,  125  congregations,  and 
10,000  members. — (Winebrenner,  V.  D.  M.) 


V.]  ORIGIN    OF   MODERN    SECTS.  215 

$  53.  Unitarians.  secessions 

f  r  om      the 

Unitarian  sentiments  made  their  appear-  congregauon- 
ance  very  early  among  the  descendants  of a 
the  Puritans  in  New  England.  In  1815,  a 
new  impulse  was  given  to  the  subject  by  the  publica- 
tion of  Belsham's  Life  of  Lindsey.  A  controversy 
was  commenced,  which  led  to  an  open  separation  be- 
tween the  two  parts  of  the  Congregational  church. 
The  Unitarians  have  about  300  congregations. — {Dr. 
Lamson,  of  Dedham,  Mass.) 

$  54.     1.  The  Methodist  Society.  The  Sece8- 

sions  from  the 

This  Society  was  first  composed  of  a  Methodists. 
number  of  members  seceding  from  the  Me- 
thodist Episcopal  church  in  the  city  of  New- York,  in 
the  year  1820,  together  with  several  of  their  trustees. 
It  had  its  origin  in  the  ruling  elder's  insisting  on  re- 
ceiving the  money  collected  in  the  different  churches 
under  his  charge  through  stewards  of  his  own  appoint- 
ment, instead  of  the  usual  and  lawful  way.  They 
have  three  Conferences. — (Rev.  W.  M.  Stillwell.) 

2.  Mkthodist  Protestant  church. 

This  sect  was  organized  in  1830.  It  consists 
mostly  of  seoeders  from  the  Methodist  Episcopal  church 
"  on  account  of  her  government  and  hostility  to  lay 
representation."  It  has  1,300  preachers,  and  60,000 
members. — (Rev, ./.  Ii.  Williams,  of  Baltimore.) 

3,  Reformed  MLethodist  church. 

This  seel    took    its  origin    from  a  feeble    sreession 

from    tli.-   MLethodisl    Episcopal   ohuroh  in   Vermont, 


216  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

1814.  They  believe  in  "  the  attainableness  of  entire 
sanctification  in  this  life."  No  statistics  are  given. — 
(Rev.  Wesley  Bailey,  Utica,  N.  Y.) 

4.   The  True  Wesleyan  Methodist  church. 

This  society  was  organized  in  1843.  It  consists 
of  seceders  from  the  original  sect,  and  from  the  Me- 
thodist Protestants.  They  united  for  the  purpose  of 
having  "  churches  free  from  Episcopacy,  Intemperance 
and  Slavery."  They  have  about  600  preachers  and 
20,000  members. — (Rev.  J.  Timberman,  Pastor,  SfC.y 
N.  Y.) 

This  completes  the  list  of  Secondary  Sects. 

AUTOTHENTIC    SECTS. 

Under  this  head  I  include  those  sects  which  can 
hardly  be  called  branches  or  offshoots  from  any  of  the 
preceding  ones;  but  which  are  rather  the  organized 
body  of  the  followers  of  some  one  or  more  influential 
individuals  gathered  from  many  sects,  perhaps,  and 
composed  in  a  measure  of  those  that  had  not  pre- 
viously belonged  to  any  sect  or  profession  of  religion. 

sects  which  §  55.  1.  Christians. 

profess   to  be 

built  upon  the  It  is  claimed  for  this  sect  that  they  do 
scriptures  a-      ^  QWe  ^heir  orisrin  to  any  one  man.     They 

lone,    as     the  o  J  j 

source  of  Di-  arose  nearly  simultaneously  in  different  sec- 
ledge.  tions   of    the    country.      In   N.   C,    James 

O'Kelly  and  several  other  preachers  seceded 
from  the  Methodists  on  account  of  some  disagreement 
in  regard  to  their  church  government.  In  Vermont, 
Abner  Jones,  among  the  Baptists,  commenced  to  preach 


V.]  ORIGIN    OF   MODERN  SECTS.  217 

against  creeds  and  sectarian  names,  and  gathered  a 
church  in  1800.  About  the  same  time  a  number  of 
Presbyterians,  in  Ky.,  and  Tenn.,  began  to  entertain 
similar  views,  and  Barton  W.  Stone,  with  several 
others,  seceded.  They  are  not  Trinitarians,  reject  in- 
fant baptism,  and  baptize  by  immersion.  They  have 
1,500  preachers,  and  500  licentiates,  1,500  churches, 
and  325,000  members. — (Rev.  David  Millard.) 

2.  The  Evangelical  Association. 

In  1796,  Jacob  Albright  began  to  preach  among 
the  Germans,  "among  whom  at  this  time  Christianity 
was  at  a  very  low  ebb."  He  was  quite,  successful, 
and  in  1800  his  followers  formed  themselves  into  an 
association ;  and  in  1803  they  introduced  among  them- 
Belves  "an  ecclesiastical  regulation."  "Albright  was 
chosen  presiding  Elder  among  them,  and  duly  con- 
firmed by  the  other  preachers,  and  ordained  by  their 
laying  on  of  hands,  so  as  to  authorize  him  to  perform 
all  transactions  that  are  necessary  for  a  Christian  So- 
ciety, and  becoming  to  an  evangelical  preacher." 
They  have  between  200  and  300  preachers,  and  near 
15,000  members. — (Rev.  W.  W.  Orwig.) 

3.  SCHWENKFELDERS. 

This  sect  was  founded  by  Caspar Sohwenkfeld  Van 
Ossing  of  Silesia.  A  number  of  them  oame  to  Penn- 
sylvania in  L734.  They  hive  a  peculiar  custom  of 
calling  their  minister  to  pray  oyer  and  for  in- 
fanta instead  of  baptizing  them.  They  invert  the 
words  of  the  institution  of  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
Bupper,  (Tin- is  My  Body,)  and  Bay,  My  Body  is  this — 
10 


218  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

that  is,  such  as  is  this  bread  which  is  broken  for  you, 
&c.  They  have  at  present  in  this  country  about  300 
families  and  5  churches. — (Isaac  Schultz.) 

4.  Universalists. 

This  sect  was  chiefly  founded  by  John  Murray  and 
Elhanan  Winchester,  from  1775  to  1780.  Their  first 
convention  was  held  in  1785.  They  believe  that  all 
retribution  or  punishment  is  confined  to  this  world. 
They  have  646  preachers,  and  990  societies. — Rev.  A. 
B.  Grosh.) 

5.  Restorationists. 

This  Sect  split  off  from  the  Universalists  in  1831, 
on  account  of  the  original  sect  declaring  against  any 
punishment  or  opportunity  for  repentance  in  a  future 
world.  They  have  14  clergymen,  and  10  or  12  con- 
gregations.— (Hon.  Charles  Hudson.) 

6.  United  Brethren  in  Christ. 

This  denomination  took  its  rise  in  the  United 
States  about  1755,  and  is  distinguished  from  the  Old 
United  Brethren  or  Moravians  by  the  additional  phrase 
"  In  Christ."  The  founder  was  Wm.  Otterbein.  The 
sect  bears  many  points  of  resemblance  to  the  Metho- 
dists, though  gathered  chiefly  from  among  the  Ger- 
mans. They  have  3  bishops,  500  preachers,  and 
65,000  members. — (Rev.  Wm.  Hanby.) 

7.  Second  Advent  Believers. 

This  sect  was  commenced  by  "Wm.  Miller,  who  be- 
gan to  lecture  in   1831.     Thej  are  distinguished  by 


V.]  ORIGIN    OF   MODERN   SECTS.  219 

their  view  of  the  second  Advent  and  their  belief  that 
the  present  dispensation  and  order  of  things  in  the 
world  will  soon  come  to  an  end.  They  have  already 
fixed  upon  several  dates  which  have  not  realized  their 
expectations.  Their  numbers  cannot  be  ascertained. — 
(Most  of  these  facts  are  taken  from  N.  Southard,  Ed- 
itor of  the  Midnight  Cry.) 

§  56.  1.  Friends  or  Quakers.  Sectawhich 

claim    some 

This  sect  was   founded  by  George  Fox.  Special  Rev" 

tt  ii-ii  +  f*  a  elation  or  In- 

He  commenced  his  labors  in  1647,  in  Eng-  spiration,  be- 
land.  About  1655,  some  of  the  people  ar-^^ 
rived  in  America.  They  discard  a  Ministry,  the  Bible- 
Sacraments,  and  outward  Forms  generally.  Without 
discarding  the  Scriptures  altogether,  they  believe  in 
an  " inner  light'1  or  "a  Spirit  within,'"  which  is  re- 
cognized as  the  principal  guide  in  divine  things. — (T. 
Evans.) 

2.  Friends  (Hicksites.) 

This  society  was  founded  by  a  secession  from  the 
foregoing  in  1^:27.  The  cause  of  the  division  was 
doctrinal  differences  in  opinion. 

3.  Shakers. 

This  sect  was  founded  by  the  French  Prophets  in 
Dauphiny  and  Cevennes,  in  France,  about  K'.sv  jn 
a  few  years,  several  hundred  protectants  professed  i<> 
be  inspired  j  their  bodies  were  mnoh  agitated  with  va- 
rious operations;  when  they  received  the  spirit  <>( 
prophecy  they  trembled,  staggered  and  fell  down,  and 
lay  as  if  they  were  dead.     Thej  recovered  twitobinj?. 


220  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

shaking,  and  crying  to  Grod  for  mercy  for  themselves 
and  all  mankind.  Three  of  their  most  distinguished 
prophets  came  to  London  about  1705.  In  1772  the 
society  residing  in  Lancashire,  England,  received  a 
revelation  from  Grod  to  repair  to  America.  They  ar- 
rived in  New- York  in  1774.  They  have  16  societies, 
and  4,500  members. — ( Thomas  Brown) 

4.  New  Jerusalem,  or  New  Christian,  church. 

This  sect  was  founded  by  Emanuel  Swedenborg, 
who  commenced  his  labors  in  this  department  about 
1743.  He  did  not  profess  to  make  a  new  revelation, 
but  merely  to  apply  a  new  key  to  its  interpretation. 
The  church  first  received  its  form  in  England  in  1783. 
The  doctrine  was  introduced  in  the  United  States  in 
1784.  The  followers  of  Swedenborg  now  generally 
claim  for  him  and  his  writings,  a  special  inspiration. 
They  have  about  5,000  members. 

5.  Latter  Day  Saints. 

"  The  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Latter  Day  Saints 
was  founded  upon  direct  revelation,  as  the  true  Church 
of  Grod  has  ever  been."  Joseph  Smith,  the  founder  of 
this  sect,  was  told  supernaturally  that  "  all  the  denom- 
inations were  believing  in  incorrect  doctrines,  and 
none  of  them  acknowledged  by  Grod  as  his."  Smith 
"was  directed  not  to  go  after  them.  On  the  21st  of 
Sept.,  1823,  a  person  appeared  to  him  calling  himself 
an  angel  of  God,  sent  to  assure  Smith  that  Grod's  cov- 
enant with  ancient  Israel  was  about  to  be  fulfilled, 
and  that  he  [Smith]  was  chosen  to  accomplish  an  im- 
portant part  of  it."     He  received  a  revelation  concern- 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF  MODERN   SECTS.  221 

ing  the  aboriginal  inhabitants  of  this  country.  He 
was  told  of  the  existence  of  certain  plates  on  which 
was  engraven  an  abridgement  of  the  records  of  the 
ancient  prophets  that  had  existed  on  this  continent. 
"  On  the  22d  of  Sept.,  1827,  the  angel  delivered  to 
Smith  the  records.  With  thewa  was  found,  also,  the 
Urim  and  Thummin  by  which  he  translated  the  re- 
cords which  were  written  in  Egyptian  characters." 
In  April,  1830,  was  first  organized  the  church  of  the 
Latter  Day  Saints.  They  have  150,000  members. — 
[Joseph  Smith.) 

This  closes  the  list  of  Sects  in  this  country,  so  far 
as  I  am  able  to  make  out  any  account  of  them. 

h  57.  In  what  I  have  said,  I  have  been        Thi8  Ac_ 

count  of  t  h  e 

mainly  indebted  to  the  industry  and  re- sectsgiven on 
search  of  Mr.  Rupp,  whose  collection  I  JJ^"1  Au" 
have  more  than  once  spoken  of.  The 
facts  are  generally  given  as  I  found  them  stated 
by  the  author,  whose  name  I  have  appended  to  each 
paragraph.  I  have  preferred  to  give  them  as  I  found 
them,  though  I  would  not  be  understood  to  vouch  for 
their  accuracy  in  all  cases.  But  if  they  are  not  cor- 
rect, the  error,  being  made  by  one  of  their  own  parti- 
sans, is  most  likely  to  be  in  their  favor;  and  at  any 
rate;  no  blame  can  be  attached  to  me  for  it. 

k  58.  Besides  the  Soots  named  above,  bmUm  tbia, 
there  are  particular  congregations  scattered  t,."r,:,?'"ui"-v 

1  o  Becta  thai  can- 

al]  over   <>ur   land,  which   arc    in    fact,   com-  ""'  '"   ,l '-'- 

munions   or   sects   l»y    themselves,   and    oi''(.,r'1„.j'r 

winch  no  account  h,ls   here    been   or   can    be 

given.  A  few  individuals  taking  a  dislike  to  some- 
thing in  the  affairs  or  doctrine  of  the  ohuroh  to  which 


222  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

they  have  belonged,  almost  without  hesitation,  make 
it  a  matter  of  conscience,  withdraw  and  constitute 
themselves  a  new  church  wholly  independent  of,  and 
disconnected  from  all  others. 

But,  besides  all  this,  the  vast  majority  of  our  popu- 
lation make  no  profession  of  religion  at  all. 

in  what  $  59.  It  is,  of  course,  unnecessary  to 
sense  these  enter  at  lar^e  into  a  discussion  of  the  con- 

Sects  claim  to 

be  christian  nection  between  these  churches  and  that 
churches.  visible  society  which  has  had  a  continuous 
existence  from  the  days  of  Christ.  The  facts  of  their 
origin  present  nothing  that  requires  anything  more  to 
be  said  than  what  we  have  already  had  occasion  to 
say,  and  the  application  of  which  is  too  obvious  to 
need  repetition  here. 

I  have  said  of  the  Primary  Sects,  and  it  is  still 
more  true  of  the  last  two  classes  that  we  have  noticed, 
that  they  make  no  pretensions  to  be  a  part  of  the 
Church  of  Christ.  Of  course  I  would  not  be  guilty  of 
a  misstatement  or  misrepresentation.  Neither  would 
I  dodge  or  evade  any  fact  or  objection  that  fairly  lies 
in  my  way.  I  therefore  recur  to  this  assertion  for  the 
purpose  of  explaining  it  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  the 
whole  matter  perfectly  clear. 

When  I  say,  then,  that  none  of  these  sects  make 
any  pretension  or  claim  to  be  parts  of  the  Church  of 
Christ,  I  must  be  understood  to  use  the  words  in  their 
strictest  and  most  appropriate  sense  as  indicating  that 
society  or  Church  which  has  had  a  visible  and  continu- 
ous existence  from  the  time  of  its  first  establishment  in 
Judea  unto  the  present  day,  and  which  has  always 
been  known  and  called  by  that  name.     Now,  in  this 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  223 

sense  of  the  words,  all  persons  readily  admit  the  cor- 
rectness of  my  assertion.  For  there  is  none  of  these 
sects  that  professes  (1)  to  have  had  a  distinct  visible 
existence  from  the  Apostles'  days — or  (2)  to  have  been 
founded  by  a  Church  that  has  had  such  an  existence, 
or  by  its  members  with  its  concurrence  and  approba- 
tion — or  (3)  finally,  to  be  in  communion  with  any 
Church  which  has  had  such  a  distinct  continuous  ex- 
istence, or  with  one  which  has  been  founded  by  such 
a  Church.  On  the  contrary  they  profess  to  have  left 
and  forsaken  that  Church  and  its  branches  on  account 
of  a  disagreement  in  doctrine,  discipline  or  worship, 
in  order  that  they  might  found  one  that  should  be 
different  in  those  respects,  and  more  agreeable  to  their 
own  opinions  and  consciences. 

Yet,  in  another  sense  it  seems  they  do  claim  to  be 
parts  of  the  Church  of  Christ  or  Christian  churches. 
I  confess  that  I  am  somewhat  at  a  loss  to  know  in  what 
terms  they  would  give  a  precise  and  definite  statement 
of  the  grounds  of  this  claim.  It  would  probably  in- 
clude several  items — such  as  a  (1)  conformity  to  the 
Scripture  model — (2)  a  harmony  with  the  Apostolic 
doctrines — (3)  the  fact  that  there  have  always  been 
persons  who  entertained  the  same  views  as  themselves 
— and  (1)  that  any  number  of  true  believers,  associa- 
ted for  the  purpose  of  religion,  are  a  branch  of  the 
Church  of  Christ. 

Now  we  may  admit  all  of  these  claims  without  at  all 
interfering  with  om  main  proposition — for  I  have  un- 
dertaken only  to  identify  that  visible  Society  or  church 
winch  was  founded  by  Christ  and  the  Apostles — I 
have  undertaken  to  show  thai  these  Sects  are,  none  of 


224  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

them,  identical  parts  of  that  Church.  This  they 
admit,  and  it  holds  equally  true,  if  the  grounds  stated 
above  on  which  they  claim  to  be  considered  churches 
of  Christ  be  admitted.  The  admission,  however,  will 
raise  a  new  issue. 

It  is  self-evident  that  the  first  two  propositions  are 
nothing  to  our  purpose.  For,  most  manifestly,  there 
may  be  many  entirely  and  totally  distinct  churches 
built  on  the  same  model,  and  inculcating  precisely  the 
same  doctrines ;  therefore  these  things  do  by  no  means 
prove  them  to  be  the  same,  or  one  identical  body.  So 
with  the  third.  A  number  of  persons,  holding  similar 
views,  do  not  necessarily  constitute  a  church.  For 
instance,  there  may  be  in  the  Church  of  England  a 
hundred  persons,  holding  Presbyterian  views,  dispersed 
throughout  the  Island  :  but  nobody  would  think  of 
calling  these  scattered  individuals  a  Presbyterian 
church.  They  are  members  of  the  English  Church 
still,  notwithstanding  their  opinions — and  form  no 
church,  society,  or  association,  by  themselves. 

But,  if  the  fourth  point  were  well  founded,  it  would 
merely  show  that  these  sects  were  each  of  them  a 
church  of  Christians — but  not  that  they  were  a  part 
of  that  Church  which  commenced  its  existence  in  the 
first  century.  They  are  as  clearly  separate  and  dis- 
tinct from  that  Church,  as  they  are  from  one  another 
and  among  themselves. 

It  is  no  part  of  my  design  to  deny  that  these  sects 
are  Christian  churches — that  is  societies  sincerely  pro- 
fessing to  be  founded  on  the  Christian  Faith,  regulated 
and  governed  by  Christian  principles,  and  aiming  at 
the  salvation  of   the   souls  of  men.      But  as   visible 


V.]  ORIGIN    OF    MODERN    SECTS.  225 

Societies,  they  are  all  distinct  one  from  another.  His- 
torically, for  instance,  there  can  be  no  more  doubt  that 
the  Presbyterian  church  is  a  separate  society — from 
that  which  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles  commenced — 
than  that  the  Presbyterians  and  the  Methodists  are 
two  and  distinct  Societies. 

$  60.  I  have,  in  my  Introductory  Chap-  J^J^ 
ter,  endeavored  to  show  the  importance  of  the  church  as 
the  identity  of  that  Church  which  Christ  when  they 
founded;  and,  to  some  extent,  wherein  that  were  written- 
importance  consists.  I  shall  now  proceed  to  show  that 
wherever  the  Scriptures  speak  of  the  Church,  they 
speak  of  a  definite  visible  body  ;  and  that  whatever 
they  say  of  any  Church  they  say  of  the  one  then  es- 
tablished. 

This  I  do  for  the  purpose  of  meeting  a  very  com- 
mon notion — that  the  Church  is  not  any  one  particu- 
l;i  r  denomination  or  visible  body — but  that  it  includes, 
and  is  made  up  of  all  denominations  who  hold  to  the 
sentials  of  the  Faith. 

This  theory  is  also  intimately  connected  with 
that  of  an  invisible  Church,  consisting  of  all  those  who 
are  truly  converted,  whatever  may  be  their  ecclesias- 
tical relations. 

I  shall  pursue  the  investigation  with  reference  to 
both  theories. 

Among  the  first  things  which  our  Lord  did  after 
entering  upon  His  public  ministry,  was  the  gathering 
around  linn  a  number  of  disciples,  for  the  purpose  of 

teaching  them  Hl8  <  I  ■  »-| >. ■  1 ,  ami  forming  their  charac- 
ter upon  the  principles  of  His  religion.  Soon  after  Mis 
\jsbension,  we  find   this  body  of  disciples  called  "the 


226  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Char 

Church."  Multitudes  were  added,  both  of  men  and 
women — branches  were  established  in  divers  places — 
Gentiles  were  converted  and  added  to  their  number ; — 
and  still,  the  society  of  those  that  had  been  converted 
to  Christ  was  called  "the  Church." 

Thus  the  Church  was  founded  before  any  parts  of 
the  New  Testament  Scriptures  were  written,  and  to 
this  they  refer  when  they  speak  of  the  Church. 

*  61.  But  it  will  be  contended  that  the  m     DUferen* 

Senses     of 

word  "Church"  is  sometimes  used  to  de-  the  word 
note  the  number  (unknown  to  us)  who  are  tneS^ptul.e^ 
to  be  heirs  of  everlasting  salvation ;  that  all 
true  believers  are  members  of  the  Church  in  this  sense 
of  the  word,  and  therefore,  their  associations  for  re- 
ligious purposes,  are  to  be  regarded  as  parts  of  the  vis- 
ible Church. 

This  is  a  matter  of  so  much  importance,  that  we 
must  examine  it  somewhat  at  length. 

The  word  "  Church"  is  not  used  in  the  English 
version  of  the  Old  Testament  at  all.  But  it  has,  of 
course,  its  corresponding  words,  both  in  Hebrew  and 
the  Septuagint.  The  Hebrew  word  means  an  "  assem- 
bly" a  "  congregation"  a  "  multitude"  or  "  mob" 
a  "swarm"  (as  of  bees,  Judges  xiv.  8,)1  The  word 
which  is  used  in  the  New  Testament  for  church 
('E*.*;>i»o-/<3c)  means  nearly  the  same,  a  "  multitude  as- 
sembled" a  "  congregation"  a  "  convention"  an  "  in- 
surrection" a  "family"'1  And  in  the  Syriac  version 
of  the  New  Testament,  which  is  a  sort  of  intermediate 
between   the   Hebrew  and   the    Greek   original,  the 

1  G-ESEN1US   in  voc.  2  Schleusner  in  voc. 


V.]  ORIGIN  OF   MODERN    SECTS.  227 

same  word  (allowing  for  idiomatic  difference)  is  used 
where  we  have  the  word  "  Church  "  in  English. 

The  word  "  Church,"  or  its  Greek  original,  is  used 
in  the  New  Testament  to  indicate  objects  other  than 
Christians  in  the  present  state  of  being,  as  follows  : — 

1.  The  Jews  while  journeying  in  the  wilderness 
between  Egypt  and  Canaan.     Acts  vii.  38. 

2.  The  mob  at  Ephesus,  and  is  translated  "  assem- 
bly" and  "  concourse"     Acts  xix.  32,  39,  40. 

3.  The  blessed  company  of  the  spiritual  beings  in 
Heaven.     Heb.  xii.  23 

4.  The  building  or  house  in  which  Christians  as- 
sembled. 1  Cor.  xi.  18,  22;  xiv.  19,  28,  34,  35; 
Heb.  ii.  12. 

§  62.  But  besides  these  cases,  it    is  ap-      The  Word 

.  .  .      .  "Church,"   in 

plied  only  to  a  visible  society  of  Christians,  the  scriptures, 
I  know  of  no  way  of  making  this  point  so  "ever  U8ed  to 

J  ~  '  denote  an  un- 

clear and  impressive  as  it  ought  to  be,  ex-  ascertainable 

,  ,.  .j  .  -  r<       .         or      indefinite 

cept  by   quoting  the  sentences  from   bcrip-  number  of 
ture,   in  which  the  word  occurs : —  persons. 

"I  will  build  my  Church."1  "Tell  it  unto  the 
Church,  if  he  neglect  to  hear  the  Church."3  "Added 
to  i  be  Church  daily  such  as  should  be  saved."3  "  Great 
fear  came  upon  all  the  Church.''4  "Persecution 
againsl  (he  Church  which  was  at  Jerusalem."1  "Made 
havoc  of  the  Church."8  "Then  had  the  Churches 
rot.''1  "  Tidings  came  unto  the  cars  of  the  Church."' 
"They  assembled  themselves  with  the  Church."9 
u  Vex  certain  of  the  Church."11    "Prayer  was   made 


1  Mutt.    xvi.    1  in.  17.     ''  Art*  ii.    17.    ■'  v.    11.  5  vii.  1.  "  via.  :\. 

1  i\    :;l  '.  »  xi.  2ft.   '"xii.  1. 


228  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

without  ceasing  of  the  Church."  x  "  Certain  in  the 
Church  that  was  at  Antioch."3  "Elders  in  every 
Church."3  "Had  gathered  the  Church  together.,"4 
"Being  brought  on  their  way  by  the  Church." 
"Received  of  the  Church."6  "Then  pleased  it  the 
Apostles  and  Elders  with  the  whole  Church." 1  "  Went 
through  Syria  and  Ciiicia  confirming  the  Churches." 
"  So  were  the  Churches  established  in  the  Faith."  9 
"  Saluted  the  Church." 10  "  Sent  to  Ephesus  and  call- 
ed the  elders  of  the  Church."  u  "  To  feed  the  Church 
of  God  which  He  hath  purchased  with  His  own 
blood." n  "  Servant  of  the  Church  which  is  at 
Cenchrea."13  "All  the  Churches  of  the  Gentiles " 
[give  thanks.]14  "The  Church  which  is  in  their 
house."15  "The  Churches  of  Christ  salute  you."18 
"  Host  of  the  whole  Church."  "  "  The  Church  of  God 
which  is  at  Corinth."18  "I  teach  everywhere  in 
every  Church."  19  "  Set  them  to  judge  who  are  least 
esteemed  in  the  Church."20  "  So  ordain  I  in  all 
Churches."31  "  Give  none  offence  to  the  Church  of 
God."*2  "  No  such  custom,  neither  the  Churches  of 
God."23  "God  hath  set  some  in  the  Church,  first 
Apostles."24  "He  that  prophesieth  edifieth  the 
Church."25  "Interpret  that  the  Church  may  receive 
edifying."26     "  Excel  to  the  edifying  of  the  Church."  w 

no 

"  If  therefore  the  whole  Church  be   come  together." 
"  Peace  in  all  Churches  of  the  Saints."  w     "  Because  I 

»  Acts  xii.  5.  2  xiii.  1.  3  xiv.  23.  4  xiv.  27.  6  xv.  3.  6  xv.  4.  7  xv.  22. 
S  xv.  41.  9  xvi.  5.  10  xviii.  22.  "  xx.  17.  iaxx.  28.  13  Rom.  xvi.  1.  14xvi.  4. 
i5xvi.  5.  16xvi.  16.  nxvL  23.  ,8 1  Cor.i.  2.  2  Cor.  i.  1.  19 1  Cor.  iv.  17. 
•ioyi  4.  -'  vii.  17-  "X.  32.  23xi.  16.  ^xh.  28.  >25xiv.4.  26xiv.  5.  OT  xiv.  12. 
»  xiv.  23.  29  xiv.  33. 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  229 

persecuted  the  Church."  l     "  As  I  have  given  order  to 
the  Churches  of  Gralatia."  a     "  The  Churches  of  Asia 
salute  you."3     "  The  Church  that  is  in  their  house."4 
"  The  grace  of  Grod  bestowed  on  the  Churches  of  Mace- 
donia."5    "Praise   in  the  Gospel  throughout  all  the 
Churches."6      "Chosen  of  the  Church."1      "Breth- 
ren are  the  messengers  of  the  Churches." 8      "  Show 
before  the  Church  the  proof  of  your  love."  9     "  I  rob- 
bed other  Churches  taking  wages  of  them."  10     "  The 
care    of    all    the    Churches." u     "  Inferior    to    other 
Churches."  I9     "  Unto  the  Churches  of  Galatia."  13     "  I 
persecuted  the  Church  of  God."  14     "  Unknown  by  face 
unto   the    Churches    of    Judea."15     "Head    over    all 
things  to  the  Church."16     "  Might  be   known  by  the 
Church." "     "  Be  glory   in  the  Church  of  Christ  Je- 
sus." ,8     "  Christ  is  the  head  of  the  Church."  I9     "  The 
Church  is  subject  unto  Christ." *     "  Christ  also  loved 
the  Church  and  gave  Himself  for  it,  that  He  might 
sanctify  and  cleanse  it  with  the  washing  of  water  by 
the  word,  that  He  might  present  it  to  Himself  a  glo- 
rious Church,  not  having  spot  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such 
thing."*     "  Nourisheth  and  cherisheth  it  even  as  the 
Lord   the  Church"  M     "A  groat  mystery,  but  I  speak 
concerning  Chrisl  and  the  Church."'23     "  Persecuting 
the  Church."*1     "  No  Church  communicated  with  me, 
hut  yeonly."*    "  The  head  of  the  Body,  the  Church."91 
"  His  body's  sake  which  is  the  Church."  w    "  Nymphas 

»10or,  w.'.t.  lxn  l.'.wi.  19,  1\m.  l'.».  6  2  Cor.  viii.  1.  6  viii.  L& 
t  viii  I'j  ,TiiL28.  '\ni  -i.  "xi.  s.  "xi.  2a  '-' xii.  18.  "GaLi,i. 
"i.  l:;.  »i  22.     "'■  Sph.  L  22.  "  ill  la  '•in.  21.  ''v.  S  24  "  I 

26,  I  J1  PbiL  in..  i...     »OoLL  ia 


230  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

and  the  Church  which  is  in  his  house."  !  "  Cause 
that  it  be  read  also  in  the  Church  of  the  Laodiceans."* 
11  Unto  the  Church  of  the  Thessalonians." 3  "  Follow- 
ers of  the  Churches  of  God,  which  in  Judea  are  in 
Christ  Jesus."4  "  Unto  the  Church  of  the  Thessalo- 
nians." 6  "  Glory  in  you  in  the  Churches  of  God." 
"  How  shall  he  take  care  of  the  Church  of  God."1 
"  The  Church  of  the  living  God,  the  pillar  and  ground 
of  the  Truth."8  Let  not  the  Church  be  charged."9 
"  To  the  Church  in  thy  house."10  "  Let  him  call  for 
the  elders  of  the  Church."11  "  Borne  witness  of  their 
charity  before  the  Church." M  "I  wrote  unto  the 
Church."13  "Casteth  them  out  of  the  Church."14 
"  John  to  the  seven  Churches  which  are  in  Asia."  1S 
"  Send  it  unto  the  seven  Churches."  16  "  The  angels 
of  the  seven  Churches."17  "The  seven  Churches."18 
"  To  the  Angel  of  the  Church  of  Ephesus."  19  "  Let 
him  hear  what  the  Spirit  saith  unto  the  Churches."  w 
"  The  Church  of  Smyrna."  21  "  The  Church  in  Perga- 
mos."22  "The  Church  in  Thyatira."23  "All  the 
Churches  shall  know."  *  "  The  Church  in  Sardis."  " 
"The  Church  in  Philadelphia."26  "The  Church  of 
the  Laodiceans."  ^  "  I,  Jesus,  have  sent  mine  angel 
to  testify  unto  you  these  things  in  the  Churches."28 

We,  of  course,  admit,  that  the  number  who  will 
finally  be  saved  is  unknown  to  man,  and  can  never  be 
ascertained  by  us  in  this  life.     The  word  "  Church" 

i  Col.  iv.  15.  2  iv.  16.  3  1  Thes.  i.  1.  4  ii.  14.  5  2  Thes.  LI.  6  L  4. 
'  1  Tim.  iii.  5.  8  iii.  15.  9  v.  16.  10  Philemon  i.  2.  "  James  v.  14.  12  3  John  6. 
13  9  1410.  '5Rev.i.4.  ,6i.  11.  "  i.  20.  18i.  20.  I9  ii.  1.  20  ii.  7,11,17,  29. 
iii.  6, 13,  22.  21  ii.  8.  «ii.  12.  ^ii.  18.  *  ii.  23.  »iiLl.  26iu\  7.  ""iii.  14 
2S  xxii.  1 6. 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN    SECTS.  231 

however,  is  never  applied  to  them  ;  but  always,  and 
only,  when  used  of  human  beings  at  all,  to  the  visible 
society  of  believers,  or  disciples,  which  was  established 
by  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles. 

If  the  reader  has  any  doubt  that  my  assertion  is 
true,  that  the  word  "  Church  "  is  never  used  in  the 
Scriptures  to  denote  what  is  called  in  the  modern 
theories,  the  "  invisible  Church"  I  hope  he  will  take 
the  trouble  to  read  over  again  all  these  ninety -four 
quotations,  with  a  special  view  to  that  point.  I  have 
taken  the  pains  to  lay  before  him  all  the  passages  in 
the  New  Testament,  in  which  the  word  occurs,  either 
in  the  English  translation,  or  in  the  Greek  original,  so 
as  to  remove  all  room  for  doubt,  that  we  have  the 
whole  subject  fully  before  our  minds. 

k  63.  That  there  is  a  visible  society  called      The    J** 

sages  in  which 

the  Church  in  the  Scriptures,  is  admitted,  the  word 
We  always  so  understand  the  word  except  gu  "™  * 
when  we    are   examining    some    particular  denote  the  in- 

i.    i  i  visible  Church 

passages,  winch  seem  to  say,  what,  in  our  cou9idm.d. 
estimation,  is  not  true  of  the  visible  Church. 
We  then  resort  to  the  admitted  fact,  that  the  number 
of  those  ih.it  are  to  be  saved,  is  always  an  uncertainty 
wiili  ii i;in,  and  apply  to  them  what  we  think  inappli- 
cable to  the  visible  society,  and  thus  come  to  the  idea 
of  an  invisible  Church,  as  the  thing  intended. 

\o\v  1  am  not  at  present  aiming  t<>  oombat  this 
idea;  hut  I  am  endeavoring  to  show  that  the  word 
"  Church"  is  never  applied,  in    the  Scriptures,  to  this 

invisible  ami    unascertained    number   of   persons.     I 
know  of  no  way  in  which  this  could  he  accomplished, 

.•xeejit    i,_\    quoting  even  passage  in  which  the  word 


232  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

occurs,  with  enough  of  the  context  to  show  its  appli- 
cation. I  am  satisfied  that  a  careful  perusal  of  these 
passages,  will  leave  the  impression,  that  what  is  called 
the  Church,  is  always  a  visible  and  definite  society  of 
persons.  We  find  it  a  body  exercising  discipline,  and 
"  as  the  Pillar  and  Ground  of  the  truth."  We  read  of 
it  as  "purchased  by  the  Saviour's  own  blood;  "as 
"  that  which  He  loved  and  gave  Himself  for,  that  He 
might  present  it  to  Himself  a  glorious  Church,  with- 
out spot,  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such  thing."  But  still  it 
is  the  Church  of  which  the  ministry  are  made,  by  the 
Holy  Grhost,  "  the  overseers,"  and  which  it  hath 
pleased  our  Lord  to  cleanse  and  sanctify,  with  the 
V) ashing  of  water  :  and  therefore,  it  must  of  necessity 
be  that  visible  Church  whose  members  have  been  ad- 
mitted by  Baptism,  and  for  whose  edification  the 
Ministry  were  appointed — for  each  of  whom  they  have 
duties  and  responsibilities,  and  whom,  for  this  reason, 
it  is  necessary  that  they  should  be  able  to  distinguish 
and  identify. 

In  one  case  only,  I  think  it  probable,  as  I  have 
already  said,  that  the  word  "  Church"  is  applied  to  a 
number  of  persons  invisible  to  us.  (Heb.  xii.  23.)  And 
they  are  invisible,  not  because  they  cannot  be  dis- 
tinguished from  others,  and  identified  as  Christians, 
but  because  they  are  not  in  this  world.  They  are 
the  "first-born  whose  names  are  in  Heaven." 

It  is  not,  however,  on  account  of  this  description  of 
them,  that  I  consider  the  Apostle  to  be  speaking  of 
beings  not  on  this  earth — for  the  expression  "  Church 
of  the  first-born"   may   mean,  either  the  Church  of 


V.]  ORIGIN    OF  MODERN   SECTS.  233 

Christ,  since  He  is  "  the  First-Born,"1  or  the  Church 
of  those  who  are  distinguished  in  some  way,  as  in 
Isaiah  xiv.  30  ;  and  surely  this  is  the  case  with  all 
members  of  the  Church.  The  expression  "  written  in 
Heaven"  proves  nothing  for  that  theory :  for  the 
Apostles  are  said  to  have  their  names  written  in 
Heaven,  Judas  among  the  rest;2  and  God  says,  "who- 
soever hath  sinned  against  me,  him  will  I  blot  out  of 
my  Book.3 

But  I  rely  chiefly  upon  the  connection  in  which 
the  expression  occurs :  "  We  are  come,"  says  the  Apos- 
tle, "  unto  Mount  Zion  [spiritual]  and  unto  the  city  of 
the  living  God,  the  heavenly  Jerusalem  ;  and  to  an 
innumerable  company  of  angels ;  to  the  general  as- 
sembly and  Church  of  the  first-born  which  are  written 
in  heaven,  and  to  God  the  Judge  of  all. 

Now,  assuredly,  if  St.  Paul,  by  the  expression, 
"  Church  of  tin-  first-born,  which  are  written  in  Hea- 
ven"  bad  meant  those  persons  living  on  the  earth,  who 
are  to  be  heirs  of  everlasting  salvation,  he  would  not 
have  placed  them,  in  his  order,  between  "  the  angels," 
and  "  God,  the  Judge  of  all,"  but  somewhere  else. 
He  was  speaking  to  the  living  saints,  and  includes 
them  and  himself  in  the  pronoun  "  we."  "  We,"  he 
>ays,  "have  come,  in  our  Christian  fellowship  and  re- 
lations, to  the  spiritual  Zion — the  company  of  angels 
— to  God — to  the  communion  of  the  spirits  of  the 
holy  men  of  old ;  now  made  perfect;  to  Jesus  Christ 
the  Mediator,  and  the  cleansing  influences  of  His 
most  precious  blood." 

i  Kmn  viii.  89 ;  OoL  L  16,  18.       a  Lata  t  SO.        s  Ex.  aarii  aa. 


234  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  Chap. 

The  "  Church  of  the  first-born,  which  are  written 
in  heaven,"  are  doubtless,  therefore,  the  orders  of  beings 
extending  upward  in  the  scale  of  creation,  from  An- 
gels to  the  Deity.  We,  as  the  redeemed  of  Christ,  are 
brought  into  the  same  family  of  God  with  them — and 
if  we  follow  on  in  the  way  of  His  commandments 
we  shall  come  to  see  their  blessedness,  and  enjoy  their 

society. 

This  use  of  the  word  "  Church,"  therefore,  gives 
no  countenance  to  its  application  to  the  unascertained 
and  undistinguishable  number  living  on  the  earth, 
who  will  finally  be  saved. 

The  church        h  64.   The  Church  contains,  undoubtedly, 
contains  Good        ^  an(j    ba(i  within  its  communion ;  the 

and  Bad    to-  » 

gether.  wheat  and  the  tares  ;  the  good  fish  and  the 

bad  ;  the  sheep  and  the  goats.  And  the  Scriptures  do 
most  unquestionably,  make  a  distinction  between  these 
two  classes  of  persons,  and  direct  our  minds  to  a  still 
more  solemn  and  awful  distinction  that  will  be  made 
at  the  Day  of  Judgment.  But  still,  neither  the  wheat 
alone,  nor  the  good  fish  alone,  nor  the  sheep  alone, 
are  the  Church  spoken  of  in  the  Scriptures,  though 
they  are  represented  as  being  in  the  Church;  and, 
together  with  the  tares,  the  bad  fish,  and  the  goats, 
they  make  up  the  visible  Society,  which  the  Scriptures 
everywhere  and  uniformly  call  the  Church. 

$  65.    It    is    readily    admitted    that   the 

The  Church  J 

an  organized  word  "  Church  "  itself,  does  not  necessarily 
Body*  imply  an  organization.     Thus  it  is  applied 

to  the  mob  collected  at  Ephesus  against  St.  Paul.1 

i  Acts  xix.  32, 39-40. 


V.]  ORIGIN  OF   MODERN   SECTS.  235 

But  we  go  behind  the  bare  signification  of  the 
word,  and  ask — not  if  "a  church"  must  necessarily 
have  an  organization,  but  whether  "the  Church"  of 
which  we  read  in  the  Scriptures,  had  an  organization 
or  not. 

Of  this  there  can  be  no  doubt.  None  were  con- 
sidered or  called  members  of  the  Church  until  they  had 
made  a  profession  of  the  Faith  and  been  baptized. 
Now  here  are  the  elements  of  an  organization,  a  basis 
on  which  it  was  built — the  Faith,  and  a  rite  of  ini- 
tiation, Baptism  and  Profession  of  the  Faith.  Baptism 
made  members  out  of  those  who  were  not  such  be- 
fore. Hence  by  these  elements — the  Creed  and  Baptism 
— those  who  believed  were  organized  into  a  body  or 
society  distinct  and  distinguishable  from  all  the  rest 
of  the  world.  But  more  than  this — there  was  a  wor- 
ship in  which  the  members  engaged — there  was  a 
Sacrament  in  which  they  often  participated — there 
was  a  Ministry  whose  instructions  they  received,  and 
whom  they  contributed  to  support. 

Now,  these  facts  may  not  prove  that  there  was 
what  is  called  "  any  particular  organization"  But 
they  prove  that  there  was  some  organization,  or  some- 
thing— call  it  what  you  please — that  gathered  the  be- 
lievers into  a  body — a  society — a  church,  and  thus 
made  them  distinguishable  from  all  the  rest  of  the 
world,  and  oapable  of  joining  as  a  society  in  united 
ami  harmonious  acts  <>f  duty,  worship,  and  charity. 
But  there  is  another  theory   whioh  teaches    that 

■r 

the  Church  is  no  particular  denomination,  but  includes 

many  or  all  denominations. 

We  have  seen  that    the   Scriptures  speak  of  the 


236  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Church,  as  only  one,  and  as  a  distinct,  organized  body 
of  believers.  Now  to  say  that  it  includes  several  or 
many  such  distinct  and  separately  organized  bodies  or 
societies,  is  to  show  an  utter  disregard  for  the  mean- 
ing of  words.  It  is  a  violation  of  common  sense  which 
nothing  but  the  stringent  demands  of  a  theory  could 
ever  occasion. 

Let  us  inquire  into  the  facts.  Are  the  Presbyte- 
rian church,  and  the  Methodist  church,  for  instance, 
one  and  the  same  church  ?  Nobody  so  regards  them. 
Nobody  ever  so  speaks  of  them.  Then  if  they  are 
not  one  and  the  same  church,  they  cannot  both  of 
them  be  one  and  the  same  Church  as  that  which  our 
Lord  instituted  ;  for  as  organized  bodies  of  professing 
Christians,  they  have  organizations  distinct  from 
each  other.  No  matter  how  similar  in  form  and  in 
principle  they  may  be — yet  historically  and  in  fact, 
they  are  not  the  same,  but  distinct  from  each  other. 
And  so  they  are  each  of  them  distinct  from  that  which 
gathered  the  believers  and  disciples  in  the  Apostles' 
days,  into  one  body. 

Ask  a  man  if  there  is  a  Presbyterian  church  in 
such-a-place,  and  he  will  say,  "  No— but  there  are  a 
good  many  Presbyterians  there — there  is  no  church, 
and  no  place  of  worship — they  have  never  organized 
themselves. " 

Such  language  occurs  daily,  and  is  used  alike  by 
persons  of  all  persuasions  and  views,  and  its  use  shows 
that  in  the  estimation  of  all  men,  there  is  no  church 
where  there  is  no  organized  society. 

And  so  with  the  other  point.  Test  it  in  any  way 
you  please,  and  you  will  find  that  people  do  never  re- 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  237 

gard  and  speak  of  societies  having  different  organiza- 
tions— different  officers — different  places  of  meeting — 
however  similar  they  may  be  in  their  design — in  doc- 
trine— in  spirit — in  forms,  and  in  principle — as  being 
one  and  the  same  society  or  church. 

Ask   any   man   if  he    considers  the  Presbyterian 
church  as  a  part  and  branch  of  the  Methodist  church — 
and  he  will  stare  at  you  as  if  you  had  lost  your  wits, 
or  were  talking  in  riddles.    The  idea  is  too  absurd  to  be 
proposed  even  as  a  matter  of  inquiry.     But  why  not  ? 
Why  is  not  the  Presbyterian  church  a  part  of  the  Me- 
thodist church ;  or  vice  versa,  why  is  not  the  Methodist 
church  a  part  of  the  Presbyterian  ?     Let  him  answer 
who  can.     But  there  is  no  more  absurdity — no  more 
inconsistency  with  historic  facts — no  more  violation  to 
the  common   use  of  language  and  the  common  sense 
of  men,  in  calling  any  one  of  these  sects  only  a  part 
of  another,  and  identified  with  it,  than  there  is  in  call- 
ing any  one  of  them  a  part  of  the  Church  of  Christ, 
and  identified  with  it.     The  Presbyterian  church  is  no 
more  a  part  of  the  Christian  Church  properly  so  called, 
than  it  is  of  the  Methodist,  the  Baptist,  or  the  Con- 
gregational  church.     In  the  first  century,  our  Lord 
and   the  Apostles  introduced  an  organization  which 
gathered  the  Christians  out  of  the  world  into  a  body 
or  society  by  themselves,  and  that  was  the  Christian 
Church.     In   the  sixteenth  century,  Calvin,  and   the 
early    Presbyterians,  introduced    another,  which   ga- 
thered the  Presbyterians  from  all  other  societies,  and 
organizations,  into  one  by  themselves,  and  thai   was 
tie-  Presbyterian  church,     [n  the  eighteenth  century, 
Wesley  anil  the  early  Methodists,  introduced  another 


238  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

organization  which  gathered  the  Methodists  in  like 
manner  together  into  a  distinct  and  separate  society 
or  church.  And  so  of  all  the  rest.  Now  these  sepa- 
rate movements,  and  organizations,  and  the  churches 
which  resulted  from  them,  are  no  more  one  and  iden- 
tical with  the  origin  of  the  Christian  Church,  and  the 
Church  itself,  than  they  are  with  one  another.  And 
so  as  we  have  seen  is  the  subject  always  regarded, 
and  spoken  of  in  the  common  use  of  language.  So  it 
is  in  the  accounts  which  these  sects  give  of  them- 
selves— as  has  been  proved  already  by  our  quotations 
from  their  own  writers. 

We  have  no  way,  therefore,  of  escaping  the  conclu- 
sion, that  whatever  the  Scriptures  say  of  the  Church 
at  all — the  necessity  of  being  in  its  communion — the 
importance  of  its  identity — the  functions  it  has  to 
perform — or  the  privileges  of  its  members — they  say 
of  that  visible  Society  which  began  its  existence  in  the 
days  of  the  Apostles,  and  must  continue  always  and 
uninterruptedly  until  the  end  of  the  world. 

we  apply  *  ^6.  Among  the  Sects  already  enume- 
what  the  rated,  we  may  find  almost  every  variety  of 
of  the  church,  doctrine  and  organization.  Some  are,  doubt- 
to  a  Modem  jegg    much  more  nearly  conformed    to  the 

Body,  on   ac-  .     . 

count  of  the  Scripture  model  than  others.     And  it  is  pos- 

tween'5  them  s]^\e  tnat  one  mignt  &n&  among  them  some 
aud  not  for  that  are  preferable  on  this  score  to  some  that 
Sari™.6™  ^  are  undoubtedly  branches  of  the  Holy  Catho- 
lic Church.  This,  however,  is  a  point  that 
we  will  not  now  discuss,  since  it  is  not  because  the 
Church  is  Episcopal  or  Presbyterian;  because  it  wor- 
ships with  or  without  a  Liturgy  ;  nor  for  any  other 


V.]  ORIGIN    OF   MODERN   SECTS.  239 

peculiarity  of  doctrine  or  organization,  that  it  is  said 
to  be  the  Church  that  our  Lord  "  purchased  with  His 
own  blood  ;"  "  gave  Himself  for  ;  "  "  that  He  might 
sanctify  and  cleanse  it,  and  present  it  to  Himself 
without  spot,  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such  thing."  But  it 
is  on  account  of  identity  or  sameness  with  the  Church 
spoken  of  in  the  Scriptures,  that  we  can  apply  these 
things  to  any  modern  body  professing  to  be  Christians. 
The  great  point  of  our  inquiry  has  been  identity 
of  origin.  The  same  vine  can  never  grow  from  seve- 
ral different  roots.  From  separate  fountains,  flow 
separate  and  distinct  streams.  They  may  flow  into 
one,  but,  until  after  their  confluence,  they  are  in  no 
sense  one  and  the  same. 

Bat  there  has  been  no  such  confluence  of  these 
sects  into  the  Church.  They  have  not  become  lost  or 
merged  in  her  communion.  They  are  as  distinct  from 
it  to-day,  as  they  ever  have  been  since  their  origin. 

I  have  compared  the  Church  to  a  vine,  starting 
from  one  root,  and  throwing  off  branches  in  diverse 
directions,  until  it  had  reached  every  nation  and  land 
on  the  face  of  the  earth. 

We  may  also  compare  its  history  to  a  sti'eam 
rolling  on  to  the  ocean.  From  some  elevated  point  we 
may  Bee  its  course  through  the  lapse  of  ages.  Moun- 
tains enolose  it  on  both  sides.  Here  a  rock  rises  in 
ragged  barrenness,  there  an  island,  covered  with  ver- 
dure and  beauty,  separate,  for  a  time,  its  waters  into 
several  channels,  each  pursuing  its  circuitous  course 
to  a  union  with  thai  from  which  it  was  separated. 
Perhaps  the  last  thai  the  eye  can  see  will  be  deltas  ex- 
tending their  dividing  influence  into  the  vei)  Lmsom 


240  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

of  the  ocean.  The  separation  between  the  East  and 
the  West  in  the  eleventh  century  is  one  such  division. 
The  Reformation  is  another.  These  may  prove  islands 
in  a  stream  yet  to  be  reunited  ;  or  the  river  may 
empty  itself  by  different  mouths  into  Eternity.  But 
whether  separate  channels  flowing  round  rock  and 
island,  or  separate  mouths  flowing  into  the  same 
ocean,  the  stream  is  one  and  the  same.  Beyond  the 
mountains  flow  others,  that  have  started  from  other 
fountains,  and  flow  in  different  channels.  The  geo- 
grapher never  confounds  the  one  with  the  other.  Their 
identity  is  never  mistaken. 

Such  is  the  history  of  the  Church,  and  so  separate 
from  it  are  the  diverse  sects  we  have  named.  They 
start  from  different  fountains,  flow  in  separate  chan- 
nels and  have  never  been  united  with  the  Church  in 
the  same  current  of  visible  existence. 

we  may,  $  67.  We  may  then  dismiss  all  considera- 
therefore,omit  £jon  0f  the  peculiarities  of  the  organization, 
relating  to  the  doctrine  and  discipline  of  these  sects,  and 
Peculiarities  no^  mvo}ve  ourselves  in  the  endless  contro- 

of  the  Organi- 
zation of  the  versies  which   a   discussion  of  these   points 

would  occasion.  We  may  lay  it  down  as  a 
matter  of  certainty,  that  Christ  has  no  Church,  ex- 
cept that  which  he  founded  in  His  own  blood.  His 
Church  became  visibly  established  and  known  by  that 
name  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles  ;  and,  by  His  own 
decree  and  revelation,  it  must  ever  continue  successive 
and  visible — spreading  and  expanding  itself  over  the 
surface  of  the.  earth,  with  branches  in  each  nation, 
articulating  with  the  main  body,  and  must  continue 
thus  to  exist  and  spread,  until  it  includes  all  nations, 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  241 

and  He  Himself  comes  in  His  Second  Advent,  to  sepa- 
rate the  evil  from  the  good,  and  terminate  the  present 
Dispensation  of  Mercy. 

$  68.  The  rise  of  sects  is  no  new  thing.     The  Rise  of 

Sects  distiuct 

It  commenced  before  the  Apostles  had  gone  from  the 
to  their  reward  and  their  rest  in  Heaven.  Chu'ch  no 

new  thing. 

The  Scriptures  frequently  allude  to  them.1 
During  the  few  centuries  immediately  before  the  Re- 
formation, they  were  not  so  numerous  as  they  had 
been  before ;  and  most  of  those  that  had  previously 
arisen,  had  become  merely  matters  of  history,  having 
no  longer  an  existence.  Thus  Grod  had  declared  his 
judgment  of  them  :  "  Every  plant  which  my  Heavenly 
Father  hath  not  planted,  shall  be  rooted  up."2 

§  69.  In  speaking  of  these  Sects  it  must  ADist>nction 

1  M  't  W  t  'i  '  U        I    1 1   « * 

be  distinctly  understood  that  we  are  speak- sects  and  their 
ing  of  them  as  societies  or  churches,  and  not  Members- 
of  the  persons  composing  them,  as  individuals.  Of 
their  members  individually,  no  one  is  more  ready  than 
I  am  to  see  and  acknowledge  whatever  there  is,  in 
them,  that  is  good  and  commendable.  Their  sincerity 
and  their  zeal  I  do  not  call  in  question.  And  though 
it  is  an  undeniable  fact,  that  their  piety  is  of  a  differ- 
ent character  from  that  which  we  find  in  the  Church 
— a  difference  which  has  very  generally  led  them  to 
disparage  the  piety  of  churchmen — and  even  to  deny 
its  existenoe  altogether;  yet  nothing  that  I  have  said 
must  he  understood  to  deny  that  t heir's  is  sincere,  and 
may  be  accepted  in  tin-  day  of  judgment.  This  is  a 
point  un  which  I  wish  to  form  no  judgment — to  express 


•  John  ii.  18,  .(<•.,  IV.  1,  -1.     fak  18.  *MatLxv.  18- 

11 


242  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

no  opinion,  but  rather  yield  myself  up  to  that  senti- 
ment which  thinketh  no  evil,  believeth  all  things, 
hopeth  all  things,  and  never  fails. 

These  sects  $  70.  We  have  now  tested  these  sects  by 
tZ™  ITh  *e  history  of  their  origin.  We  may  proceed 
the  church,  to  apply  to  them  the  other  tests,  indicated  in 
our  second  chapter.  It  is  manifest  from  what  has 
been  said,  that  none  of  these  sects  claim  to  be  parts  of 
those  Branches  of  the  Church  from  which  their  foun- 
ders seceded.  They  have  indeed  thought  that  they 
ought  to  be  admitted  to  the  communion  of  the  parent 
Church,  and  have  their  ministrations  acknowledged 
by  her  to  be  valid.  But  none  of  them  claim  that,  as 
a  fact,  they  are  admitted  to  such  a  communion,  or 
that  the  validity  of  their  ministrations  has  been  so 
acknowledged.  No  one  of  them  claims  to  be  in  com- 
munion with  any  church  which  has  existed  since  the 
Apostles'  days,  or  with  any  that  is  in  communion  with 
a  Church  that  was  founded  by  the  Apostles. 

I  now  proceed,  therefore,  to  a  more  full  considera- 
tion of  the  second  test — namely,  that  the  Church  does 
not  acknowledge  them  to  be  entitled  to  any  such  re- 
cognition. 

§  71.   I  have  several  times  referred  to  the    Jhe  c4hurch 

refuses  to  ac- 

fact,  that  the  Church  refuses  to  allow  the  knowledge 
validity  of  the  ministrations  of  these  Sects,  paerstg  0efc  Her 
or  to  acknowledge  them  to  be  legitimate  communion, 
branches  of  the  Church.  Whatever  misun- 
derstandings and  alienations  there  may  be  among  the 
different  parts  of  the  Church,  they  are  all  agreed  on 
this  point. 

k  72.  Now  the   Church  has,  from  the  very  first, 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN  SECTS.  243 

steadily  and  uniformly  refused  to  recognize    The  Church 

^  #  ^  °  has       always 

Sects  which  have  arisen  within  her  bosom,  Refused  to  be 
as  valid  branches  of  the  Church  itself.  with  sects! e 
There  were  scores  of  such  sects  before  the 
conversion  of  Const antine  :  the  period  which  is  gene- 
rally fixed  upon  by  the  sects  as  that  at  which  the 
corruption  and  apostacy  of  the  Church  commenced. 
Even  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  such  sects  arose. 
St.  Jude,  and  also  St.  John,  allude  to  them.1 

Before,  therefore,  the  example  of  the  Apostles  and 
the  light  of  inspiration  had  ceased  to  be  its  immediate 
guide,  the  Church  refused  to  acknowledge  sects  that 
had  thus  been  got  up  by  seceders,  in  opposition  to  her- 
self, not  merely  for  holding  errors — but  also,  and  chiefly 
for  being  sects.  St.  Paul  says  of  them,  that  they  hold 
not  "  to  the  Head  from  which  all  the  Body,  by  joints 
and  bands,  having  nourishment  ministered  and  knit 
together,  increaseth  with  the  increase  of  God.'J  By 
"holding  to  the  Head"  the  Apostle  means  something 
inure  than  professing  to  believe  in  Christ.  Without 
that  they  would  not  be  considered  Christians :  and 
with  it,  they  could  not  be  spoken  of  as  "  not  holding 
to  the  Head,"  if  nothing  more  was  meant  by  the 
words  than  believing  in  Christ,  or  professing  to  receive 
Christianity  as  they  themselves  understood  and  inter- 
preted it.  The  l;niLruaLr''  refers  to  an  outward  unity — 
a  visible  connection  with  the  Church  "  which  is  His 
Bodj  n  by  "joints  and  bands,"  and  they  of  whom  the 
Apostle  was  speaking,  Were  persons  professing  to  be 
Christians  without  being  in  the  Communion  of  the 
Charon. 

•  Jade  10;  l  John  u.  18,1  lOoQoafcni  a.  19. 


244  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

From  first  to  last,  therefore,  the  Church  has  claimed 
and  exercised  the  right  to  exclude  from  her  com- 
munion, and  from  identity  with  herself,  all  that  have 
arisen  as  our  modern  Sects  have  done. 

The  Right  to       $  73.  The  right  to  be  exclusive  must  be- 
be  Exclusive,  \onSr  to  tne  Church.     Without  it,  its  distinct 

indispensib  le         # 

to  the  Preser-  existence  could  not  be  preserved.  For  if  the 
D*stinct°Exifr  Church  may  not  decide  for  herself  what  are 
tence  of  the  the  essentials  of  Christianity,  and  whom  she 
will  receive  and  be  united  with;  and  so,  on 
the  contrary,  whom  she  will  reject  and  not  be  united 
with,  she  must  receive  all  that  choose  to  take  to  them- 
selves the  office  of  Preacher,  or  organize  themselves 
into  a  church,  professing  to  receive  Christianity  as 
they  themselves  understand  it,  and  to  keep  Christ's 
Commandments  as  they  themselves  expound  those 
commandments. 

A  glance  at  the  diversities  of  doctrine  and  opinion 
held  by  the  different  sects  in  our  land,  will  show  that 
there  is  hardly  a  doctrine  or  a  practice  that  might  not 
be  thus  introduced  and  prevail,  instead  of  "  the  Faith 
once  delivered  to  the  Saints." 

If  the  Church  may  not  exclude  any,  but  must 
receive  all  that  choose  to  come  as  a  part  of  herself — 
on  their  own  terms,  instead  of  their  conforming  to 
hers,  she  must  receive  their  members  to  feed  at  her 
Tables,  and  their  ministers  to  preach  from  her  Pulpits 
— for  unless  she  does  this  she  excludes  them;  or, 
which  is  the  same  thing,  declares  that  they  are  no 
part  of  herself. 

The  consequences  of  receiving  them  all,  are  easily 
foreseen.     There  would  be  such  a  variety  and  contra- 


V.]  ORIGIN  OF   MODERN   SECTS.  245 

diction  as  would  divert  the  attention  of  people  from 
the  devotional  part  of  their  services,  and  convert  the 
seasons,  which  ought  to  be  devoted  to  worship,  into 
an  intellectual  gymnasium  or  a  theological  digladia- 
tion.     The  great  mass,  from  hearing  so  many  different 
doctrines,   and  so  much  contradiction   in  matters  of 
faith,  would  become  avowed  and  unblushing  infidels  ; 
and  the  few  that  remained  and  professed  to  be  believers, 
would    be  brought  to  the    very   lowest    standard    or 
quantum  of  faith  that   might    be   advocated  by  any 
class  of  preachers,  or  run  wild  in  the  licentiousness  of 
fanaticism.      Every  new  theory  must  be  received  and 
circulated  through  the  whole  Church.     No  matter  by 
whom  originated — no   matter    how    wild — it    would 
find  followers  and  advocates.     They  organize  them- 
selves, constitute  their  leaders,  preachers,  and  must  be 
received  as  a  legitimate  Branch  of  the  Church.     And 
thus  the  Church  must  be  open  to  all,  and  the  preacher 
of  each  new  sect,  each    wild   fanaticism,  or    daring 
blasphemy,  be  allowed  to  hold  forth  in  the  pulpits  and 
before   the   congregations  of  that  Church    which   the 
Blessed  Saviour  purchased  with  His  own  blood,  where- 
ever  and  whenever  they  choose  to  present  themselves 
for  the  work  of  their  calling. 

*74.   It  can  hardly  be  necessary,  there-  TheRiKhtt« 

J  "  bo    hxclusivo 

ton-,  to  show    from    ihe   Scriptures,  that  the  proved  from 

Charon  has  this  right.  It  is  implied  in  the the8criptuim 
v.tv  faol  "t"  it-  existence)  and  of  the  intention  that  it 
si i. »hI« I  com  inn.'  to  exiel  until  the  second  ooming  <>f  our 
Lord.  Kill  their  are  passages  in  which  it  is  distinctly 
implied.  Thus  when  our  Lord  directed  the  referenoe 
of  the  ease  of  an  offending  brother  to  the  Church, 


246  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  tCnAP 

after  all  proper  efforts  at  a  private  reconciliation  had 
failed,  He  implied  the  existence  of  this  right.  "But 
if  he  neglect  to  hear  the  Church,  let  him  be  unto  thee 
as  a  heathen  man  and  a  publican."1  A  "  heathen 
man,"  is  of  course  one  who  is  out  of  the  Church,  and 
a  "  publican  "  was  one  who  was  held  in  such  an  esti- 
mation by  the  Jews,  that  they  would  have  no  friend- 
ship or  familiarity  with  him. 

The  Right  to       $  75.  A  sacred  trust  was  committed  to 
be  Exclusive,  the  Church  at  its  institution.     In  the  Ian- 

indispensable 

to  the  Preser-  guage  of  St.  Paul,  it  was  made  the   Pillar 
rSh?  °f  the  and  g^nd  of  the  Truth,"2  and  its  duty  is 
to  preserve  "the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints."3 

It  can  be  hardly  necessary  to  prove,  that  the  value 
of  the  Church  must  depend  upon  its  adhering  to  the 
Faith,  and  upholding  the  doctrines  and  principles  of 
Christianity.  Our  Lord  came  into  the  world  to  pro- 
vide a  way  for  the  salvation  of  men.  That  way  is  not 
the  mere  dictate  of  the  conscience — the  offspring  of 
human  reason.  It  is  a  direct  revelation  from  Grod. 
And,  as  we  learn  from  Revelation  itself,  the  way  of 
salvation  which  Grod  has  chosen,  is  not  such  as  the 
unrenewed  heart  and  mind  of  man  will  readily  under- 
stand or  approve.  To  the  Jews  it  was  a  stumbling- 
block,  and  to  the  Greeks  foolishness.  "  The  natural 
man  receive th  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  Grod,  for 
they  are  foolishness  unto  him,  neither  can  he  know 
them,  because  they  are  spiritually  discerned,"  and  he 
is  yet  carnal.4     And  if  any  man  will  become  a  Chris- 

»  Matt,  xviii.  17.         2  1  Tim.  iii.  15.        3  jude  3.        «  1  Cor.  ii.  11. 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN   SECTS.  247 

tian,  he  must  take  up  his  cross  daily  and  deny  him- 
self.1 

These  things  are  sufficient  to  show  that  there  will 
always  be  a  tendency  in  human  nature  to  corrupt  the 
Gospel  and  subject  it  to  its  own  control  and  modifi- 
cations. Hence  the  Church  was  committed  to  an 
unceasing  warfare  against  this  corrupting  tendency. 
Those  who  in  their  sincerity  are  ignorantly  in  error,  as 
well  as  those  who  are  wilfully  perverse,  will  contend 
that  their  opinions  are  right,  and  that  the  Church  is 
wrong.  And  the  matter  will  come  to  the  pass,  that 
either  the  Church  must  yield  or  they  will  secede,  and 
organize  themselves  into  a  church,  claiming  to  be 
acknowledged  as  a  Branch  of  the  Church  which  our 
Lord  instituted,  and  to  have  their  ministrations  ac- 
knowledged to  be  valid.  If  now,  the  Church  is 
obliged  to  acknowledge  these  claims,  she  gains  nothing 
by  their  being  a  different  church.  She  sanctions  their 
doctrines  and  doings — that  is,  acknowledges  them  to 
be  true  and  good  in  one  case  as  much  as  in  the  other. 
Thus  a  few  Presbyterians,  unless  the  Church  may 
exclude  them,  or  refuse  communion  with  them  in  case 
they  leave  and  become  a  church  by  themselves,  may 
control  the  whole  Church,  and  compel  it  to  become 
Presbyterian.  A  few  of  the  Presbyterians,  by  the 
same  process,  may  compel  the  Church,  with  the  rest 
of  the  Presbyterians,  to  become  Congregationalists, 
and  a  few  of  these  Congregationalists  becoming  Uni- 
tarians or  Universalists,  may  compel  the  whole  Church, 
Presbyterians,  Congregationalists  and  all,  to  become 

1  Luke  ix.  23. 


248  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Universalists,  and  acknowledge  the  doctrines  and  usa- 
ges of  that  sect  to  be  the  true  and  uncorrupted  Grospel 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

And  thus  any  handful  of  men,  by  a  pertinacious 
adherence  to  what  they  may  chance  to  think  is  right — 
or  by  persisting  in  what  they  know  to  be  wrong,  for 
the  ruin  of  the  Church,  may  compel  all  other  members 
of  the  Church  to  yield  their  opinions — violate  their 
own  consciences,  and  adopt  the  opinions  and  prefer- 
ences of  the  few,  unless  the  Church  has  the  right  to 
interpret  for  herself  the  Scriptures  and  exclude  those 
who  do  not  conform  to  her  interpretation  of  the  di- 
vinely-appointed terms  of  communion.  It  is  no  mat- 
ter so  far  as  the  point  now  before  us  is  concerned, 
whether  the  Church  is  obliged  to  tolerate  them,  hold- 
ing and  inculcating  their  errors  within  her  bosom,  or 
to  receive  them  to  communion,  and  acknowledge  them 
to  be  on  an  equal  footing  with  herself  after  they  have 
become  organized  into  another  body.  In  either  case 
she  is  alike  compelled  to  countenance  their  opinions, 
acknowledging  that  they  are  good  and  scriptural,  and 
that  whatever  she  has  held  different  from  them  is 
either  unimportant  or  erroneous. 

The  Right  to  ^  76.  Questions  often  arise  between  a 
interpret  its  society  and  one  or  more  of  its  members,  out 
riea  claimed  of  something  that  depends  upon  or  involves  a 
by     every  construction  of  their  laws   and  regulations. 

church     and  ° 

society  what-  And  in  all  such  cases,  the  society,  though  in 
some  sense,  and  to  some  extent,  a  party  to 
the  controversy,  claims  and  exercises  the  right  to  in- 
terpret and  put  an  authoritative  and  final  construction 
upon  its  own  laws.      In   a   Temperance   Society — a 


V.]  ORIGIN    OF    MODERN   SECTS.  249 

Literary  Association — a  Mason's  Lodge,  or  an  Odd- 
Fellow's  Encampment,  a  question  arises  concerning 
the  conduct  of  a  member,  whether  certain  acts  alleged 
to  have  been  performed  by  him,  are  violations  of  the 
principles  and  rules  of  the  society  or  not.  There  may 
be  differences  of  opinion  on  the  subject,  even  among 
the  members  who  are  not  implicated  in  the  disputed 
points.  Yet  these  societies  never  think  of  appealing 
to  any  other  body  than  themselves,  and  their  own  judi- 
catories. A  question  arises  between  a  citizen  and  the 
commonwealth,  whether  he  has  broken  its  laws  and 
incurred  a  penalty  or  not.  The  commonwealth  de- 
cides the  question  by  its  Courts,  or  by  its  Legislature, 
and  never  for  a  moment  thinks  of  referring  the  subject 
to  any  extraneous  arbiter  or  judicature.  A  question 
m list's  between  an  individual  State,  or  perhaps  several 
of  them,  and  the  United  States.  Something  of  the 
kind  did  occur  between  South  Carolina  and  the  Union, 
in  the  well-remembered  case  of  Nullification.  The 
General  Government — though  a  party  to  the  contro- 
versy— decided  the  question  itself,  and  would  have 
enforced  its  own  decision  in  the  case,  as  it  clearly 
intimated,  by  an  appeal  to  arms — if  the  nullifying 
state  had  not  submitted. 

Instances  involving  the  same  principle  occur  almost 
daily  in  every  religious  body  in  our  country.  A  mem- 
ber of  th'-  Presbyterian  church,  for  instance,  is  repre- 
sented to  have  oommitted  some  offence  againsl  the 
rules   ;iihI    regulations   of  tin-    society.      He  thinks, 

perhaps,  that    his   act   is  liable  to  no  blame  or  Oensure. 
The  matter  is  broughl   before  the  Session.       It   may  be 

carried   up  t<»  the    I'reshyterv — and  to  the  General 

I  I* 


250  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Assembly.  But  how  high  soever  it  be  carried,  and 
wherever  it  may  be  decided,  the  Presbyterian  church 
claims  the  right  and  authority — as  Session,  Presby- 
tery, General  Assembly,  or  in  some  other  capacity,  by 
herself  and  her  own  judicatories, — to  interpret  her  own 
Documents — decide  upon  the  acts  of  her  own  members 
— and  deal  with  them  according  to  her  own  decisions. 
She  never  thinks  of  appealing  to  any  judicature  out 
of  her  own  communion,  or  of  allowing  her  formularies 
and  laws  to  be  made  of  none  effect  by  the  pertinacity 
of  private  interpretations.  She  puts  her  own  inter- 
pretation upon  the  law,  judges  of  the  acts  of  her 
members,  and  they  must  submit — or  be  excluded  from 
her  communion.  The  excluded  members  may  be  in 
the  right,  and  the  church  altogether  wrong,  in  the 
case.  Yet  if  she  decides  against  them,  and  excludes 
them  from  her  communion,  they  are  no  longer  mem- 
bers of  the  Presbyterian  church. 

The  same  is  true  of  every  sect  and  church  in  our 
land.  In  some  form  they  claim  the  right  to  exercise 
discipline  over  their  members — to  decide  upon  the 
terms  of  communion  which  they  will  adhere  to  and 
enforce.  And  if  any  number  of  their  own  members 
choose  to  depart  from  them,  or  organize  on  a  different 
basis,  they  are  forthwith  regarded  as  a  distinct  body 
— another  church. 

The  Bible  itself  is  a  document  of  the  Church.  It 
was  written  after  the  Church  was  instituted.  It  was 
written  in  the  Church  by  members  of  the  Church,  for 
the  Church,  and  is  addressed  to  the  Church  and  its 
members  ;  and  the  right  to  interpret  the  Scriptures  and 
every  other  revelation  of  the  Divine  Will — if  there  can 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN    SECTS.  251 

be  any  other — is  implied  in  the  authority  described  in 
Matt,  xviii.  15-17,  where  it  is  said  that  if  one  "  neg- 
lects to  hear  the  Church,  let  him  be  unto  thee  as  a 
heathen  man  and  a  publican." 

§  77.  In  this  there  is  implied  no  assump-    Th«R'ghtto 

1  ■      be    Exclusive 

tion  of  infallibility  for  the  Church,  bat  only  implies  no 
the  right    which  every  religious   sect,  and      -  l  liy' 
every  society  of  persons  associated  for  any  object,  find 
it  necessary  to  adopt  and  act  upon  in  order  to  preserve 
their  distinct  existence. 

Although  the  Church  has  always  had  creeds  and 
canons  of  her  own  composition,  yet  these  have  always 
been  regarded  by  her  as  either  brief  and  convenient 
statements  of  what  was  contained  in  the  Scriptures, 
or  such  subordinate  regulations  as  were  necessary  for 
the  due  performance  of  the  divine  functions  entrusted 
to  her,  and  which,  therefore,  she  had  a  right  to  make. 
The  Church  has  never  claimed  the  right  to  make  addi- 
tions to  the  Faith  or  to  decree  anything  contrary  to 
the  Scriptures.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  the  Roman 
Branch  of  the  Church  has  advanced  such  claims. 
And  in  withholding  the  cup  from  her  laity  in  the  Sa- 
crament of  the  Lord's  Supper,  she  acknowledges  that 
our  Lord  instituted  the  Sacrament  tit  both  kinds,  and 
directed  it  to  be  so  received.1  And  it  may  be  said 
that  Romanists  generally  hold  that  they  have  a  right 
to  decree,  from  time  to  time,  new  Articles  of  the  Faith 
— which  must  be  received  on  pain  of  damnation. 

The  Church  of  England,  on  the  contrary,  claims 
no  such  right   <»r  authority.     She  says  thai    "Holy 

1  Council  of  Tnnt,  S6ML  xxi.  Chap.  i. 


252  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Scripture  containeth  all  things  necessary  to  salvation : 
so  that  whatsoever  is  not  read  therein,  nor  may  be 
proved  thereby,  is  not  to  be  required  of  any  man  that 
it  should  be  believed  as  an  article  of  the  Faith,  or  be 
thought  requisite  or  necessary  to  salvation."  "  The 
creeds  [the  Nicene  and  the  Apostles']  ought  thoroughly 
to  be  received  and  believed,  for  they  may  be  proved  by 
most  certain  warrant  of  Holy  Scripture."  "  The 
Church  hath  power  to  decree  rites  and  ceremonies, 
and  authority  in  controversies  of  Faith  ;  and  yet  it  is 
not  lawful  for  the  Church  to  ordain  anything  that  is 
contrary  to  God's  Word  written,  neither  may  it  so 
expound  one  place  of  Scripture  that  it  be  repugnant  to 
another."1 

Since,  then,  the  Romish  Branch  of  the  Church 
claims  the  right  to  decree  new  articles  of  faith,  and  rites, 
and  ceremonies,  which  are  contrary  to  the  Scripture — 
the  rejection  of  these  sects  by  her  might  be  nothing  to 
their  disadvantage.  Her  rejection  might  be  their 
commendation. 

But  when  their  ministrations  are  disowned  by  the 
Oriental  Branches  of  the  Church  which  have  never 
fallen  into  the  Romish  corruptions,  and  never  claimed 
the  ris^ht  to  add  to  "  the  Faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints,"  and  by  the  Reformed  Branches,  which  have 
returned  for  their  Standard,  to  the  Scriptures  alone  as 
understood  by  the  Primitive  Church,  the  case  is  mate- 
rially different.  A  decision  in  which  all  these  Branches 
of  the  Church — every  body  of  Christians  that  can  be 
identified  with  the  Church  spoken  of  in  the  Scriptures, 

1  Article  vi.,  viii.,  and  xx. 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF  MODERN   SECTS.  253 

diverse  and  divided  as  they  are  on  many  important 
points — carries  with  it  a  weight  of  moral  power  that 
cannot  well  be  disregarded. 

§78.  Now   the    Scripture    contains   the    The  church 

1  must  have  the 

Grospel  which  the  Church  is  to  preach — and  mghttointer- 
the  terms  of  Communion  which  she  is  to  {[[J^ fjJr  j"J£ 
adopt,  and  should  enforce.  We  claim  for  the  self- 
Church  no  right  or  authority  to  make  laws  of  her 
own,  except  so  far  as  shall  be  necessary  for  the  per- 
formance of  those  functions  which  her  Lord  gave  her 
to  do. 

But  the  Church  must  have  the  right  to  interpret 
the  Scriptures  for  herself,  to  decide  what  are  the 
instructions  that  have  been  given  her.  There  is  no 
extraneous  judicature — no  body  having  authority  over 
"her  to  which  she  is  subordinate,  and  to  which  an  ap- 
peal can  be  made. 

$  79.  The  ri<mt  to  be  exclusive  is  claimed    The  Right  to 

be    Exclusive 

by  every  sect  and  church  in  our  land.     No  claimed  by  ;iii 

d:n  • ,  i    • .  _  •_ j •         •       •     Sects  aud  So- 

enomi  nation  will  open  its  pulpits  indiscrimi-  cietieg 

nately  to  those  that  are  recognized  as  minis- 
ters in  other  denominations.  They  will  receive  none, 
in  fact,  who  do  not  mainly  agree  in  sentiment  with 
themselves.  If  they  should  do  otherwise,  their  creeds 
and  standards  would  be  disregarded  and  contradicted, 
and  the  denomination  jtself  would  lose  its  distinctive 
features.  Hence  they  aTe  all  more  or  less  exclusive. 
The  Presbyterians  would  do!  receive  to  their  Presbj  tery, 

or  ad  mil  to  preaob  in  their  pulpits,  men  who  deny  the 

Divinity  of  Christ,  or  the   future  punishment  of  tin? 
finally-impenitent.     CJniversalists  will  not  fellowship 

and   harmonize   with   those  who  hold    high  Calvinistio 


254  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

notions  of  Election  and  Reprobation,  or  who  deny  the 
sacredness  and  binding  obligation  of  the  Marriage 
Covenant. 

This  is  only  what  each  sect  and  church  in  our 
land  is  doing.  There  is  no  one  of  them  that  is  not 
seeking  to  extend  its  communion.  They  have  appli- 
cations from  persons  and  societies  of  persons  to  be 
received  into  union  with  themselves. 

This  devolves  upon  them  the  necessity  of  ascer- 
taining what  are  the  opinions,  the  character,  and  the 
usages  of  the  applicants.  The  Church  examines  into 
these  matters,  and  accepts  or  rejects  their  application 
as  it  is  found  necessary. 

Now  the  refusar  to  receive  applicants  is  based  on 
the  same  principle  as  the  expulsion  of  unworthy 
members,  or  the  refusal  to  be  in  communion  with 
them  if  they  organize  themselves  separately  into  a 
distinct  church. 

It  is  the  right  to  decide  for  themselves  what  are 
their  own  terms  of  communion,  and  to  exclude  all 
that  will  not  conform  to  them. 

But  suppose,  for  a  moment,  that  any  denomina- 
tion— the  Presbvterians  for  instance — were  obliged  to 
open  their  pulpits  to  all  who  call  themselves  Teachers 
of  the  Grospel  ;  or  all  who  are  recognized  as  such  by 
any  Sect  or  denomination.  It  would  be  impossible  to 
preserve  the  distinctive  features  of  their  system.  To- 
day an  Armenian  would  deny  their  view  of  Election 
— to-morrow  a  Socinian  would  deny  the  Atonement 
soon  a  Unitarian  would  deny  the  Divinity  of  Christ 
a  Universalist  the  Future  Punishment  of  the  wicked 
the  Quaker  would  deny  all  ordinances  and   creeds 


V.]     -  ORIGIN   OF   MODERN  SECTS.  255 

Shem  Zook  would  denounce  the  use  of  buttons  on 
one's  coat  as  Anti-Christian ;  William  Miller  would 
teach  that  the  end  of  the  world  was  even  now  at  the 
doors  ;  and  Joseph  Smith  must  be  allowed  to  set  forth 
the  claims  of  his  new  revelation  and  "  the  church  of 
the  Latter  Day  Saints."  And  the  actual  creed  of  the 
church,  whatever  might  be  its  name,  would  include 
all  these  views  and  as  many  more  as  any  one  might 
choose  to  present — that  is,  the  Presbyterian  church 
would  teach  them  all. 

Now  certainly,  what  could  not  but  happen  in  the 
case  of  the  Presbyterians,  would  most  inevitably  be 
the  result  in  the  Church  if  it  were  not  allowed  to  be 
exclusive  and  decide  for  itself  against  whom  it  must 
close  its  pulpits  and  whom  it  must  reject  from  its 
Communion.  There  is  not  an  Article  of  its  Creed 
that  would  not  be  denied  in  the  pulpits — quite  as 
often  perhaps  as  it  would  be  affirmed.  There  is  not  a 
principle  of  its  constitution  that  would  not  be  held 
up  to  contempt  and  ridicule — not  a  canon  or  rule  of 
its  salutary  Discipline  that  would  not  be  continually 
trampled  under  foot — for  there  is  not  a  point  in  all 
her  doctrines  or  discipline  that  has  not  been  denied 
and  on  account  of  which  sects  have  been  formed  in 
opposition  to  the  Church,  because  she  would  not  allow 
theni  to  persist  in  denying  it  within  her  communion. 
The  Divinity  of  Christ — the  Incarnation — Human 
Depravity — tin;  possibility  of/orgiveness  for  sins  after 
Baptism,  were  all  denied  by  one  and  another  Sect,  be- 
fore  the    Papal  Corruptions  began  to  overspread  the 

Church,  and    if  the  sects  who  advooated    these    errors 
had  not  heen  excluded  and  condemned  by  the  Church, 


256  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

the  Faith  itself  could  not  have  been  preserved  within 
it.  The  Church  must  have  yielded  point  after  point, 
until  she  had  descended  to  the  dead  level  of  infidelity 
and  natural  religion. 

And  it  could  not  be  otherwise  now  ;  the  Faith 
would  be  denied,  the  Sacraments  omitted,  and  the 
Church  itself  would  melt  away  and  become  merged 
as  an  undistinguishable  part  of  the  unconverted  world, 
if  it  were  not  allowed  to  keep  up  its  own  lines  of  de- 
markation. 
The  church         §  80.  It  is  sometimes  thought  that  all 

th?sdee8w°ho  should  be  recognized  and  acknowledged  by 
have  erred  in  the  Church,  who  hold  to  the  fundamental 
gards  as  Fun  articles  of  the  Christian  Faith.  Suppose 
damentais.  we  acjmit  the  position.  The  question  then 
arises,  who  is  to  decide  what  are  the  Fundamental 
and  essential  articles  ?  If  the  Sects  themselves — 
then  none  will  be  excluded,  for  none  of  them  will 
admit  themselves  to  be  deficient  in  these  points. 
Shall  the  sentiment  of  the  majority  prevail  ?  The 
Church  herself  is  always  the  majority.  Even  at  this 
day  she  is  more  than  ten  to  one  against  all  the  sects 
combined.  And  besides  this,  she  has  a  past  of  nearly 
two  thousand  years  to  appeal  to,  and  to  learn  from  the 
ages  before  us,  what  have  been  held  to  be  the  essen- 
tials of  the  Christian  Religion  by  those  who  are  now 
glorified.  And  they  of  course,  are  always  a  majority 
against  those  living  in  this  or  any  one  age. 

If  the  Church  should  draw  a  line  excluding  some 
of  the  sects  and  receiving  others — those  excluded 
would  have  the  same  ground  of  complaint  that  they 
now  have,  and  could   enforce  their  demand   to  be  re- 


V.]  ORIGIN   OF  MODERN  SECTS.  257 

ceived  by  an  appeal  to  the  precedent  set  in  the  recep- 
tion of  their  more  highly  favored  brethren.  For  the 
common  ground  upon  which  they  all  stand,  is  sincerity 
in  the  reception  of  the  Christian  Religion,  as  they 
themselves  understand  it.  Whereas,  the  ground  on 
which  the  Church  stands,  is  the  fact  that  she  was 
divinely  instituted  to  keep  and  inculcate  this  sacred 
trust — the  Christian  Faith — whereby  alone  men  can 
obtain  the  remission  of  their  sins,  and  are  made  par- 
takers of  the  kingdom  of  Heaven. 

But  the  fact  is,  all  these  sects  have  violated  and 
rejected  some  of  the  principles  of  the  Christian  Reli- 
gion which  the  Church  holds  and  always  has  held,  to 
be  fundamental.  In  this  I  refer  not  only  to  her  view 
of  the  unity  of  organization  and  jurisdiction  of  the 
Church  in  each  particular  nation — but  also  to  her 
view  of  the  Sacraments,  the  Ministry  and  the  Wor- 
ship. But  an  investigation  into  these  points  would 
lead  us  aside  tV«>in  our  plan  and  require  more  time  and 
Bpace  than  can  be  devoted  to  it.  I  refer  to  the  fact 
only  for  the  purpose  of  saying  that  the  Church  must 
draw  the  line  where  she  has  drawn  it,  or  depart  from 
what  she  has  always  held  to  be  fundamental  points  in 
the  sacred  trust  committed  to  her. 

If,  then,  we  allow  the  Church  to  have  this  right, 
the  line  must  be  drawn  somewhere,  so  that  all  beyond 
it  will  be  excluded.  In  excluding  all  as  new  sects 
which  have  been  founded  by  persons  that  had  forsaken 

or  been  expelled  from  her  communion,  established  on 
a  different  basis,  and  in  a  oountry  where  they  wage 

perpetual  warfare  against  herself — she  pursues  a 
course  that  is   perfectly  consistent,  and   the   only  one 


258  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

that  can  secure  her  integrity  and  perpetuity — she  is 
adhering  to  the  fundamental  principles  laid  down  in 
the  Scriptures. 

The  Recog-        $  81.  But  after  all,  it  is  unnecessary  to 
nition  of  these  msist  upon  this  point.     For  if  the  Church 

Sects    by   the  r  x  .       .    . 

chorch,  could  should  recognize  these  sects  as  legitimate 
not  after  an,  Branches  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  and  ao- 

mate       them 

identical  with  knowledge  the  validity  of  their  ministra- 
tions— they  could  not  be  identified  with  her 
so  long  as  they  continue  their  distinct  and  separate 
organizations  with  ministries  and  congregations  of 
of  their  own,  separate  from  hers.  The  sects  them- 
selves cannot  be  identified  with  her.  Their  origin  is 
different.  Their  organization  is  different.  Their  his- 
tory is  different ;  and  until  their  sectarian  existence 
ceases,  they  must  be  distinct  from  the  Church.  When 
their  organizations  are  dissolved,  and  they  cease  to  be 
Presbyterians,  Baptists,  Lutherans,  Methodists,  &c, 
&c,  their  members,  as  individuals,  may  be  received 
into  the  Church  and  identified  with  her  existence. 
But  until  then,  no  recognition  or  acknowledgment  by 
her  can  be  of  any  advantage  to  their  ecclesiastical 
position.  She  cannot  acknowledge  that  they  are  her- 
self, and  that  she  is  somebody  else.  She  can  neither 
change  her  own  identity,  nor  the  history  and  circum- 
stances of  their  origin.  These  things  are  fixed  beyond 
the  possibility  of  recall  in  the  inexorable  past. 

I  trust  now  that  it  is  perfectly  evident  that  the 
Church  has  done  only  what  she  had  a  right  to  do,  and 
has  acted  a  consistent  and  uniform  part  through  the 
whole  period  of  her  history,  including  now  over  eigh- 
teen centuries,  and  has  taken  the  only  course  that 


V.]  ORIGIN  OF   MODERN   SECTS.  259 

could  preserve  her  existence.  At  all  events,  there 
are  none  that  can  condemn  the  principles  on  which 
she  has  acted ;  since  they  have  all  found  it  necessary 
to  adopt  and  act  upon  the  same  principles  themselves. 
Without  them,  neither  their  existence,  nor  hers,  could 
be  preserved. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND  SINCE  THE  REFORMATION. 

We  now  recur  to  the  Church  of  England  in  order 
to  explain  a  few  events  in  its  history  from  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Reformation  in  the  reign  of  Henry 
VIII.  to  1789,  at  which  time  the  Branch  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church  in  America  was  fully  established,  and 
became  complete  in  its  organization  and  independent 
in  its  existence. 

§  1.  We  have  seen  that  the    Church   of 

The  English  .  .  .         ,     .  . 

church  always  Christ  was  established  in  England  in  the 
a  Distinct  ^^  century,  that  it  continued  perfectly  in- 

Branch  of  the  J  1  ...... 

Church  of  dependent  of  any  foreign  jurisdiction  until 
chmt-  after  the  Saxon  invasion  at  the  close  of  the 

sixth  century — that  from  that  time  the  Papal  influence 
increased  in  England  until  its  final  rejection  by  the 
Church  as  a  united  body,  in  1534,  and  that  since  that 
time,  the  Church  of  England,  with  those  derived  from 
it,  constitutes  the  chief  part  of  the  third  Great  Divi- 
sion of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ — to  wit :  the 
Reformed. 

Henry  vin.        *  2.  Henry  VIII.  died  in  1547,  and  was 
opposed  the  succeeded  by  his  son,  Edward  VI.,  January 

Reformation   _^„         -^       .  . ,         .       .  r    tt  ) 

in  the  last  part  29.  During  the  last  ten  years  of  Henrys 
of  his  Reign.   reignj  ne  had  rather  retarded  than  promoted 


Chap.  VI]  THE    CHURCH   OF   ENGLAND.  261 

the  Reformation.  The  spirit  which  had  been  thus  re- 
pressed burst  forth  with  perhaps  too  much  of  impetu- 
osity on  the  change  in  the  sovereignty.  The  first 
reformed  Liturgy  was  published  May  4,  1549,  and 
came  into  use  the  Whitsunday  following.1  The  first 
Book  of  Homilies  had  been  published  in  the  July 
before.  But  before  the  end  of  1551,  the  Prayer  Book 
had  been  again  revised  and  materially  altered.  This 
second  Prayer  Book  of  Edward  VI.  was  brought  into 
use  from  the  Feast  of  All  Saint  s^  November  1,  1552. 
In  the  next  year  the  Articles  (now  XXXIX.,  but  then 
XLII.  in  number)  were  published. 

k  3.  But  it  pleased  Almighty  Grod  to  put  The  Accea- 
a  stop  to  the  rapid  progress  of  this  work  by  Uie  Papist. 
the  death  of  Edward,  who  was  succeeded  by 
his  half-sister  Mary,  July  6,  1553.  Mary  was  the 
daughter  of  Catherine  of  Arragon,  and  a  zealous 
Papist.  She  set  about  restoring  Popery  to  its  former 
position  in  the  English  Church,  and  thus  occasioned 
the  first  of  those  events,  which  for  our  purpose,  we 
need  to  consider. 

*  4.  At  the  time  of  the  rejection  of  the  M  **?&>*» 

J  M  o  d  e       o  f 

Pupal  Supremacy,  the  Church  of  England  Church  action 
consisted  of  two  Archbishoprics  and  nineteen  U1    "gl" 
Bishoprics — twenty-one   in  the  whole.-      Besides  the 
immediate  acts  of  the  chief  Pastors,  or  Bishops  of  these, 
68,   the  ecclesiastical    authority    was   exercised  by 

1  Caki'.v  i  i  [/■  '/'""  TAtswgies  ,,f  Kim-Aim  V I.  compared  /'/'/.  ]>.  L& 
urn  urn  »t,  London,  Winchester,  Ely,  JAncoln,  Country  and  lAtch- 
Itcld,  Salisbury >  Bath  and  Wells,  Exeter,  Norwich,  Carlisle,   Worcester, 
Hereford,  (Mcnoster,  Rock  iter,  fife  Davids,  /..*»</<///',  n.nn,,,,-,  St.  Asaj>h, 
\"kk,  Dnrham. — Oouxn,  vol  iv.  j>.  L88. 


262  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Convocations  and  Synods  as  follows :  There  were  two 
Convocations,  one  for  the  province  of  Canterbury,  and 
one  for  that  of  York.  These  Convocations  usually 
assembled  separately,  though  they  often  transacted 
business  in  common.  They  consisted  of  two  Houses 
each — the  upper  composed  of  the  Bishops  of  the  Prov- 
ince, and  the  lower  of  Priors,  Deans,  Archdeacons, 
Proctors,  &c,  &C.1  The  Convocation  assembled  only 
at  the  call  of  the  king  and  transacted  no  business 
without  his  permission.  The  Synods,  on  the  other 
hand,  are  councils  of  the  Church  assembled  by  the 
Archbishops,  or  by  the  general  consent  of  the  Bishops, 
and  act  independently  of  the  state. 

New  Bishop-  .§  5.  After  the  Reformation  had  been 
ncs founded.  comrQenced,  six  new  Bishoprics  were  erected 
during  Henry  VIII.'s  reign,  1540-1542 — Chester, 
Oxford,  Gloucester,  Peterborough,  Westminster  and 
Bristol.  Westminster,  however,  was  dissolved  and 
united  to  London,  in  the  Parliament  which  met  Janu- 
ary 23,  and  sat  until  April  15,  1552.2  The  Bishopric 
of  Gloucester  was  suppressed  the  same  year  and  added 
to  Westminster.3 

Durham  was  suppressed  by  the  Parliament  in 
March  of  the  next  year,  [1553,]  with  the  design  of 
establishing  two  in  its  stead.  But  Edward  dying  soon 
after,  this  design  does  not  seem  to  have  been  carried 
into  effect.4 

Hence,  at  the  commencement  of  Edward's  reign, 

1  Lathbury's  Hist  of  Convocation,  p.  99. 

2  Burnett's  Hist.  Ref.  vol.  ii.  p.  302.     N.  Y.  EA  1842. 

3  Burnett,  vol.  ii.  p.  324. 

*  Burnett,  vol.  ii.  p.  342.  See  also  Collier,  vol.  v.  p.  501,  602. 


VL]  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND.  263 

there  were  twenty-seven  Bishoprics  in  the  English 
Church.  Westminster,  Gloucester  and  Durham  hav- 
ing been  suppressed  during  his  reign ;  there  were  only 
twenty-four  when  Mary  came  to  the  throne,  July  6, 
1553.  In  the  August  following  she  restored  the  See 
of  Durham,1  and  it  was  confirmed  by  the  act  of  Parlia- 
ment in  April  of  the  next  year,  [1554.]2  I  have  not 
been  able  to  find  in  any  documents  within  my  reach 
an  account  of  the  restoration  of  Gloucester,  or  the 
date.  But  I  find  in  Burnett3  a  declaration,  that  on  or 
before  the  18th  of  March,  [1554,]  a  conge  d'  Hire  was 
issued  to  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  Gloucester,  among 
others,  for  the  election  of  a  Bishop,  and  Brooks  was 
elected.  He  died  in  the  year  following,  and  the  See 
was  vacant  when  Elizabeth  came  to  the  throne.  It 
has  since  been  united  to  Bristol. 

Ripon  was  erected  in  1836,  and  Manchester,  1847, 
so  that  the  whole  present  number  is  twenty-seven. 

I'uringthe  most  of  Edward's  reign  there  were 
twenty-seven  Bishoprics.  At  the  commencement  of 
Mary's  reign,  however,  there  were  only  twenty-four, 
and  during  her  reign  there  were,  for  the  most  part, 
twenty-six. 

My  object  in  these  statements  has  been  to  get  at  a 
definite  tact  whereby  to  determine  what,  in  the  esti- 
niai  ii»n  of  the  English  Church,  was  at  that  time  neces- 
sary t<>  ('(institute  an  Kcclesiastioal  body,  or  Convoca- 
tion,  capable  of  acting  in    a    legislative  capacity,  or 

1  BoBxarr,  vol.  ii.  p,  : 

•  >i  in  it.  vol.  vi.  [i.  71.  :ui'l    I '.i  UflRT,  vol.  ii.  p.  184. 

•  I'.iuMii.  toL  ii.  p.   i-7.  Bee  ilao  Woaniwomra'a  EocL  /<'<•</..  Bd 

FA,  vol.  ii.  p.  :;.-.!.  n.  *  . 


264  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

in   such  a  way  as  to  have   its  acts  binding  on  the 
Church. 

no  changes        *  6.  During  the  reign  of  Henry  VIIL,  no 
in  the  Bishop-  changes  in  the  Clergy  were  made  in  order  to 

rics,  or  in  the  ~  . 

ciergy  made  effect  the  Reformation.  Fisher  of  .Rochester, 
m  Henry's  however  refused  to  acknowledge  the  Supre- 

Reign, in  order  '  D  *■ 

to  effect  the  macy  of  the  King  over  all  persons   in   his 

Reformation.     .  .         ,  ...  . ,      ,  /•         •  i 

kingdom,  claiming  that  supremacy  for  the 
Pope.  He  was  accused  of  high  treason,  and  beheaded 
June  22,  1535,  aged  seventy-seven. 

§  7.  In  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.,  there 

Changes  ° 

in  Edward's  were  several  deprivations  for  political  and  reli- 
gious causes.  October  1549,  Edmund  Bonner, 
Bishop  of  London,  was  deprived  of  his  see.  In  April 
of  the  next  year,  Stephen  Gardiner,  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester, was  also  deprived.  The  cause  in  both  cases 
was  partly  political,  and  partly  ecclesiastical.  There 
were  also  four  other  deprivations  during  this  reign ; 
Day,  of  Chichester,  Heath,  of  Worcester,  Voisy,  of 
Exeter,  and  Tunstal,  of  Durham.1 

I  do  not  desisrn  to  undertake  the  defence  of  all 
these  things.  I  mention  them  only  for  their  bearing 
upon  the  question  of  the  identity  of  the  English 
Church,  through  the  period  named  above,  that  is,  from 
1534  to  1789. 

None  of  these  deprived  Bishops  continued  to  claim 
their  Sees  or  to  exercise  the  functions  of  their  office 
after  their  deprivation,  and  their  places  were  imme- 
diately filled  by  others.  Six  out  of  twenty- seven  were 
a  minority  too   small  to  affect  the  integrity  of  the 

1  Collier,  vol.  v.  p.  425,  441,  500. 


VL]  THE    CHURCH   OF   ENGLAND.  265 

Episcopate,  and  no  pretence  is  set  up  that  the  identity 
of  the  Church  was  lost,  or  that  a  division  in  the  Church 
or  a  secession  from  it,  was  effected  thereby. 

*  8.  But  on  the  accession  of  Mary,  we    c  ****** 

*  made  on  the 

find  changes  made  that  were  of  a  different  Accession  of 
character.  She  recalled  all  of  the  Bishops  ^ 
named  above,  as  having  been  deprived,  ex- 
cept Voisy,  who  had  died.  Four  Bishops  were  im- 
prisoned— Ridley  and  Latimer  in  the  tower,  Hooper 
and  Coverdale  in  the  Fleet.1  Soon  afterwards  Hoi- 
gate,  Archbishop  of  York,  was  sent  to  the  Tower 
also.3  In  March,  1553-4,  four  Bishops,  Holgate,  of 
York,  Ferrar,  of  St.  David's,  Bird,  of  Chester,  Bush 
of  Bristol,3  w§re  deprived  for  being  married.  In  the 
same  month  Taylor,  of  Lincoln,  Hooper,  of  Glouces- 
ter, and  Harley,  of  Hereford,  were  deprived  on  the 
ground  that  they  held  their  sees  only  during  good 
behavior?  a  condition  which  Mary  pretended  that 
they  had  forfeited.5  Bishops  Poinet,  of  Winchester, 
Barlow,  of  Bath  and  Wells,  Scorey,  of  Chichester, 
and  Coverdale,  of  Exeter,  had  been  compelled  to  flee 
the  country  in  order  to  save  themselves.  And  besides 
these,  Cranmer,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  had  been 
attainted  of  high  treason,  for  signing  the  instrument 
settling  the  crown  upon  Lady  Jane  Grrey.6 

Thus  thirteen  Bishops,  viz  : — Cranmer,  Ridley, 
Hooper,  Coverdale,  Holgate,  Ferrar,  Bird,  Bush, 
Taylor,  Harley,  Poinet,  Barlow,  and  Scorey,  a  major- 
ity out  of  all   that   were  in  possession  of  sees  when 

1  Cm. in  u.  \<>l.  vi.  page  14.  s  [bid  page  23. 

8  [bid.  pa-.-  r,4,  comp.  66.  *  DmmUt  btm 'placito. 

6  Ibid,  page  65.  «  Ibid,  page  36. 


266  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Mary  came  to  the  throne,  were  deprived  and  put  to 
silence  by  her  on  one  pretence  or  another ;  this 
was  not  done,  however,  by  any  competent  ecclesias- 
tical authority.  It  was,  therefore,  as  completely  an 
act  of  persecution  against  the  Church,  as  though  it 
had  been  done  by  the  Emperors  of  Pagan  Rome,  or 
the  Authorities  of  the  Mahometan  Imposter.  The 
places  of  these  men  were  all  filled  by  Mary  with 
men  who  were  violent  papists.  And  besides  these,  as 
we  have  before  seen,  Durham  was  restored,  and  Tun- 
stal,  a  papist  also,  restored  to  it. 

Hence  fourteen  Bishops  of  her  own  choosing  were 
put  into  possession  of  sees  in  England,  to  fill  vacan- 
cies of  her  own  creating,  within  a  very  short  period 
after  Mary  came  to  the  throne. 

With  a  majority  thus  provided  it  is  not  at  all  won- 
derful that  the  Queen  succeeded  in  making  any 
changes  in  religion  that  she  chose  to  make. 

Latimer  had  resigned  his  see  during  the  reign  of 

Henry  VIII.     He,  with  four  other  Bishops,  Cranmer, 

Ridley,    Hooper,    and    Taylor,   were    burnt    at    the 

stake   for  their  refusal  to  conform  to  papacy.     From 

the  list  given  by  Maitland,1  it  appears   that  no  less 

than  two  hundred  and  seventy -seven  persons,  including 

the   four    Bishops   just    named,    suffered    martyrdom 

for  their  religion  during  this  reign. 

k  9.  Of  the  Bishoprics,  six,  to  wit :  Can- 
changes  on  ' 

the  Accession  terbury,  Hereford,  Bangor,  Gloucester,  Salis- 
of  Elizabeth.   bur^  and  0xford?  were  vacant  by  death,  on 

Elizabeth's  accession,  November  1558:  four  became 

1  Essays  on  Subjects  Connected  with  the  Reformation  in  England. 
pp.  576-582. 


VI]  THE   CHURCH   OF    ENGLAND  267 

vacant  by  the  death  of  the  incumbent  before  the  oath 
of  supremacy  was  offered  them,  to  wit :  Rochester, 
Chichester,  Norwich,  and  Bristol.  Fourteen  Bishops 
were  deprived  for  not  acknowledging  the  Queen's 
supremacy,  and  one,  Anthony  Kitchen,  of  LlandafT, 
took  the  oath.  Of  the  deprived  Bishops,  some  of 
them,  as  Bonner,  Gardiner,  and  Tunstal  had,  in 
Henry  VHIth's  reign,  acknowledged  and  maintained 
the  very  supremacy  which  they  now  refused,  and  for 
refusing  which,  they  were  deprived. 

From  the  foregoing  account  it  appears  that  only 
one  of  the  Bishops  in  England  that  was  in  the  exer- 
cise of  Episcopal  functions  at  the  close  of  Mary's  reign, 
continued  to  hold  his  office  after  the  accession  of 
Elizabeth.  Stanly,  of  Sodor  and  Man,  also  retained 
his  place.1  But  of  the  fourteen  Bishops  deprived, 
three,  to  wit :  Christopherson,  of  Chichester,  Bourne, 
of  Bath  and  Wells,  and  Tubkrville,  of  Exeter,  at  the 
least,  held  sees  whose,  lawful  Bishops  had  been  driven 
out  by  violenee,  and  consequently,  after  their  return, 
they  were  the  rightful  incumbents  of  those  sees. 
Hence  the  number  that  were  ejected  by  the  oath  of 
supremacy  is  reduced  to  eleven.  Thus  fourteen  smx, 
a  majority  out  of  the  twenty-six,  were  at  that  time 
vacant  in  the  course  of  nature,  or  filled  with  Bishops 
acknowledging  the  supremacy,  and  who  would  con- 
cur in  restoring  the.  Ivcfonnation  ;  and  this,  too,  with- 
out any  ejection  either  violent  or  otherwise,  <»n  the 
part  of  Queen  Elizabeth. 

Kitchen  conformed.    Barlow,  &  obey,  Coverdalb, 

1  Bramhall'i  Vmdieatum  <•/  tkt   Protottmt  Bi»kop*%  Otm$*onxtUm. 

\\  nik-,  v..l.  iii.  pil;r,.  •_':;•_>,  ,■,].   [s  i  i 


268  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Hodgkins — besides  some  suffragan  Bishops — returned 
from  abroad  and  were  put  into  a  condition  to  resume 
their  duties  and  jurisdiction.  By  these  Bishops  the 
vacant  sees  were  filled  up. 

$  10.  The  restoration  of  the  Reformation 

genlnuiy'cm.7  seems    to  have   been  generally   popular,   as 

fjim   to  the  is  £0  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  only  one 

hundred  and  eighty-nine  out  of  about  ten 

thousand  (that  is,  less  than  one  in  fifty)  of  the  Clergy 

refused  compliance.1 

These        §  11.  Now,  in  the  first  place,  the  fourteen 
changes  d  i  d  non-conforming  Bishops  did  not  draw  off  a 

not  effect  the  .  ,  .  , 

identity  of  the  party  with  them  over  whom  they  continued 
chmch.  ^0  exercise  jurisdiction.  They  lived  and  died 

vacant  Bishops — some  in  England,  (eleven,)  and  the 
rest  (three)  went  beyond  seas/*  And  when,  some  ten 
years  after,  the  Papal  adherents  seceded  and  formed  a 
sect  by  themselves,  these  Bishops  were  not  placed 
over  them,  nor  did  they  setup  any  claims  to  be  Bishops 
over  any  body,  or  any  thing  in  England. 

And  here  again  I  must  say  that  I  am  not  now 
aiming  to  justify  all  that  was  done  by  Elizabeth.  The 
whole  matter  may  be  stated  thus  in.  the  alternative. 
If  the  proceedings  of  Mary,  in  restoring  popery,  are 
held  to  be  valid,  then  the  proceedings  of  Elizabeth 
are  much  more  so  :  for  they  were  less  the  result  of  the 
exercise  of  secular  and  political  authority.  But  if 
the  proceedings  of  Elizabeth  are  not  valid,  on  account 
of  the  secular  authority  used  in  bringing  them  about, 
then  those  of  Mary  are  not  valid  for  the  same    reason 

1  Short's  Hist.  §  407.  2  Collier,  vi  p.  251. 


VL]  THE    CHURCH  OF   ENGLAND.  269 

acting  with  an  hundred-fold  greater  force,  and  popery- 
was  never  lawfully  established  during  her  reign,  and 
no  authority  of  any  kind,  either  secular  or  ecclesiasti- 
cal, was  required  to  abolish  it  on  the  accession  of 
Elizabeth.  In  either  case  Protestantism  was  legally 
and  validly  established  in  the  English  Church  in  the 
first  years  of  Elizabeth's  reign. 

The  identity  of  the  Church,  therefore,  was  not 
affected  by  the  occurrences  of  this  period. 

$  12.  In   a  very   few   years,  perhaps  as    The  Earliest 

J  j  '    \  i  Secessions 

early   as    1567,   persons   who    had    learned  from  the  Eug- 
Presbyterianism     during     their     residence 
abroad,    in    Mary's  reign  began  to  secede    from    the 
Church,  hold    meetings,   and  form   a   sect  by  them- 
selves. 

1.  The  first  Presbytery  was  organized  at  Wands- 
worth,  in  the  county  of  Surrey,  about  four  miles  from 
London.1  This  occurred  1572.  Other  Presbyteries 
were  soon  organized  in  other  parts  of  England :  and 
thus  coiniiH  \\rr(\  the  Presbyterian  Sect  in  England. 

2.  In  15(39,  Pope  Pius  V.  issued  a  Bull  calling 
upon  all  who  regarded  his  authority  to  secede  from  the 
English  Church,  and  form  themselves  into  a  Sect  in 
subjection  to  him.  This  Sect  was  first  governed  by 
Jesuits  and  Missionary  Priests.  In  1593,  an  Arch- 
1'ii.M  w.is  appointed  over  them,  and  in  1623,  they 
were  placed  under  titular  Bishops. 

3.  In  15N3,  Ivohkiit  Bbowh  organized  a  society  or 
church,  on  Independent  or  Congregational  principles — 
and  thus  began  another  Seel  in  England.  They  are, 
perhaps,  best  known  as  "///<   Puritans.9* 

i  Coi  mi  t,  vi.  p.  529. 


270  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Besides  these,  there  was  also  a  small  Sect  of 
Baptists  or  Anabaptists. 

But  all  these  sects  put  together,  included  only 
a  very  small  part  of  the  population  of  England. 
The  great  mass  of  the  people  still  remained  in  the 
Church. 

No  one  of  these  sects  ever  claimed  to  be  "  the 
Church  of  England,"  properly  so  called.  But  on  the 
contrary,  by  their  acts  and  by  their  admissions,  they 
acknowledged  themselves  to  be  new  Sects. 

From  the  restoration  of  the  Reformation  at  the 
accession  of  Elizabeth  until  the  Rebellion  of  1640, 
nothing  further  occurred  that  we  need  to  notice  in  this 

place. 

The  §  13.  I  need    not   now    enumerate   the 

Rebellion.  causes  which  contributed  to  the  growth  of 
Puritanism  in  England.  In  1640,  the  Church  entered 
upon  a  more  energetic  course  than  it  had  previously 
pursued,  to  prevent  the  spread  of  Popery,  and  other 
forms  of  error  in  England,  which  provoked  a  deter- 
mined resistance  from  all  against  whom  these  efforts 
were  directed.  The  calamities  that  overtook  the 
Church,  however,  arose,  tc  a  very  great  extent,  from  her 
alliance  with  the  State,  the  administration  of  which 
had  become  unpopular,  and  needed  reformation. 

Early  in  November,  was  assembled  what  is  called 
the  Long  Parliameut.  They  soon  resolved  themselves 
into  a  "  Committee  of  religion,"  and  this  branched  off 
into  divers  sub-committees,  one  of  which  was  for  pro- 
viding "preaching  ministers  and  for  removing  scanda- 
lous ones."  On  the  10th  of  March  a  bill  was  brought 
into  the  House  of  Commons  and  passed  "  that  no  Bish- 


VI]  THE    CHURCH   OF   ENGLAND.  271 

op  should  have  any  vote  in  Parliament."     The  bill, 
however,  did  not  pass  the  Upper  House. 

On  the  17th  of  July,  the  Commons  underlook  a 
measure  for  materially  changing  the  form  of  Church- 
government,  but  finding  it  impossible  to  accomplish 
any  of  their  plans  while  the  Bishops  retained  their 
constitutional  seats  in  Parliament,  thirteen  of  the 
Bishops  were  impeached  of  high  treason.  The  ground 
of  their  impeachment  was,  in  fact,  the  fidelity  with 
which  they  had  done  their  duty  according  to  the  laws 
of  the  Church  and  of  the  Realm.  This  impeachment 
was  found  untenable,  and  dropped  soon  after  it  was 
made.  The  opposition  to  the  Bishops  increased,  how- 
ever ;  and  soon  after,  they  were  prevented  from  going 
to  attend  in  their  places  in  the  House  of  Lords  by  a 
mob  throwing  stones,  &c.  &c,  at  them.  The  mob 
was  encouraged  by  the  Commons.  The  Bishops  pro- 
tested against  the  validity  of  any  laws  that  might  be 
passed  while  they  were  thus  deprived  of  their  vote. 
They  were  immediately  impeached  of  high  treason  for 
this  protestation,  and  imprisoned  in  the  Tower.  Soon 
after,  hostilities  actually  commenced  against  the 
king. 

In  May,  1643,  the  Commons  (who  were  now  the 
only  branch  of  the  Parliament  that  can  be  regarded 
as  responsible  for  what  was  done)  called  the  famous 
Westminster  Assembly,  for  re-modeling  their  ecclesi- 
astical affairs.  An  arrangement  was  made  with  the 
Sootofa  Covenanters,  by  which  the  Scotch  were  to  as- 
sist the  English  against  their  king,  and  the  English 
were  to  abolish  Episoopaoy  and  establish  Presbyteri- 
anism  in  the   English  Church.     In  October,  1644,  it 


272  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

was  declared  in  Parliament,  that  Presbyterian  ordi- 
nations should  be  held  valid  in  the  Church  of  England. 
The  Ordinance  for  abolishing  the  Common  Prayer 
and  establishing  the  Presbyterian  Directory  was 
finally  passed  March  13th,  1645,  and  Episcopacy  sup- 
pressed by  the  same  authority  the  9th  of  October 
following.1  And  it  was  made  a  crime  to  use  the  Com- 
mon Prayer  either  in  the  Church  or  in  their  families, 
punishable  with  a  fine  of  five  pounds  for  the  first 
offence,  ten  for  the  second,  and  one  year's  imprison- 
ment for  the  third.2 

The  chmch  *  l^.  Notwithstanding  these  laws,  the 
did  not  con-  Bishops  and  the  great  mass  of  the  Clergy 
fori  to  these  never  complied.  Many  of  them,  as  Sander- 
changes.  sorij  Hackett,  Bull,  Fell,  Alliston  and  Dol- 
ben,  continued  to  use  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
or  to  repeat  its  contents  without  the  Book. 

This  change  it  will  be  observed  was  made  by  an 
authority  that  was  purely  and  exclusively  secular — 
for  the  Bishops  had  been  excluded  from  the  House  of 
Lords  by  the  mob,  and  then  by  attainder  ;  and  the 
Westminster  Assembly  were  only  a  committee  to 
prepare  matters  for  the  Parliament  to  set  forth  and 
enforce  by  its  own  authority.  We  certainly  cannot 
call  the  Parliament  and  its  adherents  the  Church  uj 
England,  as  things  then  were,  without  doing  violence 
to  all  our  ideas  of  identity  and  all  sense  of  propriety 
in  the  use  of  language. 

TheRestora-  *    15'    We    n0W    PaSS    0VeI"    Seveml    YeaTS 

tion.  to  the   Restoration  in  1660.     On  the  29th 

1  Beren's  History  Prayer  Book,  p.  195.     2  Collier,  vol.  viii.  p.  296. 


VL]  THE   CHURCH   OF    ENGLAND.  273 

of  May  in  this  year,  Charles  II.  was  recalled  to  the 
Throne  of  his  ancestors.  The  Presbyterians  had  been 
defeated  in  their  original  intention  by  the  Indepen- 
dents, and  therefore  readily  joined  with  the  Church- 
men in  desiring  the  Restoration.  It  is  not  improbable 
that  they  entertained  the  hope  that  Presbyterianism 
might  be  established  in  the  Church — being  a  sort  of 
middle  ground  between  Episcopacy  and  the  Indepen- 
dents, who  were  then  the  ruling  party.  But  in  this 
they  were  disappointed.  The  Restoration  necessarily 
implied  the  nullification  of  all  the  laws  and  ordinances 
that  had  been  passed  since  about  1643,  when  the 
constitutional  requisites  for  the  passage  of  a  law  had 
been  disregarded.  This  restored  the  Bishops  and  the 
other  Clergy  who  had  been  ejected  by  Parliament,  to 
their  old  places  again. 

k  16.  Nine  out   of   twenty-six    Bishops    The  Fining 

.  i       t>  up  of  the  va. 

lived  to  recover  their  sees  at  the  Kestora-  cant  See3. 
lion,  to  wit:  Juxon  of  London,  Pierce,  of 
Bath  and  Wells,  Skinner,  of  Oxford,  Warner,  of 
Rochester,  Roberts,  of  Bangor,  Wren,  of  Ely,  Duppa, 
of  Salisbury,  King,  of  Chichester,  and  Frewen,  of 
Coventry  and  Litchfield.  The  other  sees  of  course, 
had  not  been  filled  ;  for  the  object  of  the  change  was 
to  do  away  with  Episcopacy  altogether.  On  the  first 
Sunday  in  Advent,  six  new  Bishops  were  consecrated 
for  the  following  sons,  Durham,  St.  David's,  Peter- 
borough, Llandaff,  Carlisle  and  Chester.  The  re- 
maining sees  were  tilled  si »on  after,  and  all  things 
restored  in  the  Church  as  before;  1643. 

k  17.    We  have  seen  the  character  of  the    measures 
which    Mary  took   to  secure  a  majority  in  the  Convo- 


274  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

The  Polity  cation  that  should  be  of  her  views.     When 

of  the  English 

church   never  she  had  done  this,  and  not  before,  she  be- 
changed  by  compunctious  about    using  the  secu- 

any    Compe-  l  ° 

tent  Authority.  [ar  authority  for  religious  purposes,  and 
resigned  the  regale  into  ecclesiastical  hands.  On 
the  accession  of  Elizabeth,  six  sees  were  vacant, 
four  became  so  before  the  oath  of  supremacy  was 
tendered  to  them,  three  were  lawfully  in  the  hands 
of  Protestant  Bishops  who  returned  from  their  exile, 
and  one  conformed — making  fourteen,  a  majority, 
which  were  soon  filled,  without  any  violence  to  the 
laws  of  the  land  or  the  Church,  with  Bishops  who 
were  friends  of  the  Reformation.  Thus  by  an  act  of 
Providence,  Elizabeth  was  saved  the  necessity  of  any 
violent  or  arbitrary  ejection  in  order  to  secure  a  major- 
ity in  the  Church  in  favor  of  Protestantism.  Provi- 
dence had  done  the  work  before  she  had  any  occasion 
to  do  it  herself.  Even  the  three  who  held  the  sees 
from  which  the  returning  exiles  had  been  unlawfully 
expelled,  would  not  have  been  disturbed  if  they  would 
have  acknowledged  the  Queen's  supremacy.  She 
could  have  provided  for  the  returning  Bishops  in  some 
of  the  vacant  Sees.  The  other  eleven  who  occupied 
places  for  which  there  were  no  lawful  claimants  living, 
might  also  have  retained  their  places  notwithstanding 
their  religious  opinions,  if  they  would  have  acknowl- 
edged her  supremacy.  But  by  holding  that  she  her- 
self, and  her  government,  were  rightfully  subject  to  the 
Pope  in  temporal  as  well  as  in  ecclesiastical  affairs, 
their  opinion  was  of  the  nature  of  treason,  and  was  so 
regarded.     And  for  this  they  were  ejected. 

But   in  the  Pccbellion,  as  it  is  called,  the  changes 


VL]  THE    CHURCH  OF   ENGLAND.  275 

were  made  without  even  the  pretence  of  the  concur- 
rence of  the  Church,  acting  either  in  Convention  or 
gyll0t] — by  any  means  produced.  Neither  Convention 
nor  Synod  were  held — from  the  commencement  of  the 
lon<r  Parliament  in  the  autumn  of  1640,  until  the  8th 
of  May  1661,  after  the  Restoration.1 

The  Church  of  England,  therefore,  never  consent- 
ed to  the  change  that  was  made  in  its  Doctrines,  Wor- 
ship, and  Polity  during  that  period,  and  as  soon  as  the 
state  of  the  kingdom  would  permit,  resumed  her  for- 
mer position  and  went  on  as  before.  An  effort  was 
indeed  made  at  the  Savoy  Conference  to  modify  the 
Liturgy  so  as  to  retain  some  that  were  inclined  to  se- 
cede, but  nothing  of  importance  in  this  respect  was 
accomplished. 

\  18.  We  now  pass  to  the  Revolution.  TheRevo- 
On  the  18th  of  May  1688,  seven  Bishops  lutiou- 
drew  up  a  protest  and  petition  against  cer- 
tain measures  of  King  James  II.,  for  introducing  Po- 
pery into  his  kingdom.  This  protest  was  afterward 
approved  and  signed  by  six  other  Bishops.  The  meas- 
ure resulted  in  James'  fleeing  from  the  kingdom,  and 
the  call  of  William,  Prince  of  Orange,  to  the  Throne. 
On  the  secession  of  William,  however,  six  of  these 
Bishops — Sanoroft  of  Canterbury,  Turner  of  Ely, 
Pramptom  of  Gloucester,  Wnrri:  of  Peterborough,  and 
Ki.nn  of  Bath  ;md  Wells,  refused  to  acknowledge  him 
RB  Icing  while  .lames  was  alive,  and  were  ejected,  with 
a  large  number  of  the  Clergy,  for  their  refusal.  The 
Non-Jurors,  as  they  were  called,  continued  for  some 

1  LaXUURY  s    History  Convocation,   \<\>.  286-23% 


276  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

time  to  maintain  a  separate  communion.  Boothe,  the 
last  of  their  Bishops,  died  1805, '  and  the  party  became 
extinct  soon  after. 

After  the  accession  of  William,  an  attempt  was 
made  to  change  the  Doctrines  and  Worship  of  the 
Church  materially.  But,  as  Bishop  Burnet  con- 
fesses,'2 this  was  not  done  chiefly  through  fear  of  the 
advantage  which  the  change  would  give  the  Non- Ju- 
rors in  claiming  to  be  the  Church  of  England,  and  de- 
claring the  adherents  to  William  to  be  seceders. 

This  fact  is  sufficient  to  determine  the  identity  of 
the  Church  after  the  Revolution  with  that  before  it. 
The  ejection  of  the  Non-Jurors  may  have  been  unjusti- 
fiable, (that  is  a  point  not  now  under  discussion,)  but  it 
did  not  change  the  identity  of  the  Church. 

From  this  period  no  change  occurred  that  needs  to 
be  mentioned,  until  after  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  this  country,  having  been  founded  by  mem- 
bers of  the  English  Church,  became  entirely  indepen- 
dent of  it,  and  therefore  we  need  not  pursue  its  histo- 
ry, for  our  present  purpose,  any  further. 

The  Eng-  *  19-  Tfte  competency  of  the  English 
lish  Branch  Church  to  extend  the  communion  of  the  visi- 
Exfend  the  ble  Church  of  Christ  by  founding  new  branch- 
church  ofes^  -g^  j  suppose,  sufficiently  obvious  from 
what  has  already  been  said.  Being  herself, 
by  her  perpetuated  existence,  unquestionably  a  branch 
of  that  Church,  and  having  set  up  no  standard  of  her 
own,  which  she  would  have  interpreted  to  mean  any- 
thing contrary  to  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  "  the  Faith 

1  Lathburt's  Non-Jurors,  p.  412. 

3  History  of  His  Own  Times,  p.  544,  Smith's  edition,  without  date. 


VL]  THE    CHURCH   OF   ENGLAND.  277 

once  delivered  to  the  Saints,"  as  held  by  the  Church 
in  its  earliest  and  purest  days,  and  having  neither  re- 
jected nor  lost  anything  that  is  essential  to  its  integrity 
and  jurisdiction,  she  can  send  forth  her  missionaries 
with  the  assurance  that  Her  Lord  will  accept  their 
work. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

THE    INTRODUCTION    OF    THE    CHURCH    INTO    THE    UNITED 

STATES    OF    AMERICA. 

We  come  now  to  a  most  important  stage  in  the 
progress  of  our  investigation :  the  introduction  of  the 
Church  into  the  United  States. 

As  this  continent  was  unoccupied  by  Christians 
until  the  sixteenth  or  seventeenth  century,  it  will  be 
in  vain  to  look  for,  or  expect  any  establishment  of  the 
Church  here  by  the  immediate  Apostles  and  Disciples 
of  our  Lord.  We  are,  therefore,  compelled  to  look  to 
the  labors  and  efforts  of  missionaries  and  colonists  of 
a  later  date  ;  and  all  that  we  can  reasonably  ask  is, 
that  we  may  find  that  the  Church  was  extended  into 
this  country  in  accordance  with  the  fundamental 
principles  of  its   extension   and   identity. 

The  First  $  1-  The  first  settlement  made  by  any 
settlement.  Christian  people  within  the  portion  of  the 
continent  which  subsequently  became  the  United 
States  of  America,  was  at  Jamestown,  in  Virginia, 
May  13,  a.  d.  1607.  Earlier  attempts  had  been  made, 
but  they  all  came  to  nothing. 

"  As  early  as  1580,  letters  patent  were  granted  by 
Queen  Elizabeth  to  Sir  Humphrey  Gilbert,  to  go  to 
America,  and  '  prosecute  effectually,  the  full  possession 


Chap.  VII]     CHURCH   IN  THE  UNITED   STATES.  279 

of  those  so  ample  and  pleasant  countries  for  the  crown 
and  people  of  England.'1  His  patent  granted  him 
'  free  power  and  liberty  to  discover  all  such  Heathen 
Lands  as  were  not  actually  possessed  by  any  Christian 
Prince  or  people,''  and  to  establish  his  jurisdiction 
there,  '  provided,  always,  that  the  statutes  he  devised 
should  be,  as  near  as  conveniently  might,  agreeable  to 
the  laws  and  policy  of  England ;  and  provided,  also, 
that  they  be  not  against  the  true  Christian  Faith  pro- 
fessed in  the  Church  of  England.'  "2 

"  In  consequence  of  some  collision  at  sea  with  the 
Spanish,  as  it  is  supposed,  this  expedition  came  to  no 
permanent  result. 

"  Though  Sir  Humphrey  had  sacrificed  the  great- 
est part  of  his  fortune  in  fitting  out  his  first  missionary 
expedition  to  this  country,  yet  he  was  not  discouraged 
by  this  failure.  About  five  years  after,  he  sold  all  that 
remained  of  his  property,  and  obtained  the  assistance 
of  other  wealthy  persons,  and  fitted  out  another  expe- 
dition. He  landed  at  Newfoundland,  and  after  various 
reverses  and  misfortunes,  was  obliged  to  return.  On 
his  way  home,  he  was  shipwrecked.  '  Gilbert  was 
forced  most  unwillingly,  to  turn  his  course  homeward. 
His  own  little  barge  was  ill-suited  for  the  violence  of 
the  open  sea,  but  he  would  not  forsake  his  comrades. 
On  the  voyage,  the  storms  grew  more  outrageous,  and 
be  was  pressed  to  come  on  board  the  larger  vessel.' 
'  We  are  as  near  Heaven  by  sea  as  by  land,'  was  the 
answer  of  the  gallant  man.  But  he  could  not  save 
the  crew  he  would  not  leave.     That  same  night,  as  he 

1  WiLBtuKoiui.'s  Mst.  of  the  American  Okurek,  p.  9     -  H>id.  p.  10. 


280  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

led  the  way,  his  companions  in  the  larger  vessel  saw 
the  lights  of  his  barque  suddenly  extinguished.  She 
had  sunk,  with  all  on  board.'  m 

"  Soon  afterward,  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  obtained  a 
similar  patent,  and  sent  forth  two  vessels  for  the  coast 
of  Carolina.  Six  times  did  this  man  despatch  expe- 
ditions on  the  same  errand,  till  his  fortune  was  ex- 
pended in  the  attempt. 

"  In  1606,  a  new  company  applied  for,  and  obtained, 
from  James  I.,  a  charter  for  settling  Virginia.  Their 
expedition  sailed  on  the  19th  of  December,  and  reached 
Cape  Henry,  in  Virginia,  April  26,  1607.  They  had 
with  them  the  Rev.  Robert  Hunt,  a  Presbyter  of 
the  Church  of  England.  On  the  14th  of  May,  the 
day  after  their  arrival  at  Jamestown — the  place  of 
their  settlement — they  took  possession  of  the  territory, 
and  Mr.  Hunt  administered  the  Holy  Eucharist,  ac- 
cording to  the  rites  of  the  English  Church,  to  the  com- 
pany.2 Among  the  first  buildings  erected  was  a  Church. 

"  Thus,"  says  Dr.  Hawks,3  "  Jamestown  was  the  first 
permanent  habitation  of  the  English  in  America,  and 
Virginia  commenced  its  course  of  civilization  with 
one  of  the  most  impressive  solemnities  of  the  Christian 
Church." 

$  2.  A  leading  motive  in  all  these  efforts 
motive  in  this  at  the  settlement  of  America,  is  declared  to 

Sm  to  extend  nave  ^GGn  "  ^ie  honor  of  God,  and  compas- 

the  church  sion  for  the  poor  infidels  {Indians,)  captiva- 

ed  by  the  Devil  "  it  seeming  probable  that 

1  Wilberkorce,  as  above,  p.  16.  2  Ibid.  p.  22. 

3  Narrative    of  events  connected  with  the  rise  and  progress  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  Virginia,  p.  20. 


VIL]  CHURCH   IN  THE  UNITED   STATES.  281 

God  hath  reserved  these  Gentiles  to  be  reduced  into 
Christian  civility  (civilization)  by  the  English  nation." 
And  in  the  patent  it  is  expressly  ordered  that  the 
officers  of  the  colony  "should  provide  that  the  true 
"Word  and  Service  of  God  be  preached,  planted,  and 
used,  according  to  the  rites  and  doctrines  of  the 
Church  of  England,  not  only  in  the  said  colonies,  but 
also,  as  much  as  might  be,  among  the  savages  border- 
ing upon  them  ; "  and  "that  all  persons  should  kindly 
treat  the  savage  and  heathen  people  in  those  parts, 
and  use  all  proper  means  to  draw  them  to  the  service 
and  knowledge  of  God."1 

$  3.  In  order  to  show  how  completely  the  The  Doctrines, 
doctrine,  discipline,  and  worship  of  the  Eng-  JJ^^ 
lish  Church  were  enforced,  I  will  give  an  the  church  of 
abstract  of  some  of  the  laws  adopted  in  the  strictly  En- 
colony  in  the  earliest  periods  of  its  existence,  forced. 
[1611]  for  the  purpose  of  enforcing  them. 

The  first  commands  that  Daily  Prayer,  morning  and 
evening,  be  observed. 

No  person  could  speak  against  the  Holy  Trinity 
— blaspheme  the  name  of  God — speak  lightly  of  His 
Holy  Word,  or  demean  himself  unworthily  or  disre- 
Bpeotfully  unto  any  minister  of  the  same,  under  se- 
vere penalties. 

The  sixth  law  ordains  that  "every  man  and  wo- 
man, daily,  twice  a  day,  upon  the  first  tolling  of  the 
bell,  shall  upon  the  working  days,  repair  unto  the 
Church  to  hear  divine  service."  No  man  might  break 
or  profane  the  Sabbath. 

1  Wilbkkkoui  i,  \<\>.  0,  'Jit,  'Jl.  S..;il-..  \[  wvks  Narrati vr,  p.  19. 


282  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Ministers  were  obliged,  in  addition  to  the  daily 
Service,  to  preach  on  Wednesday  and  on  Sunday 
morning,  and  to  catechize  the  children  on  the  Sunday 
afternoon. 

Every  person  on  arriving  in  the  colony  must  give 
an  account  of  his  or  her  faith  to  the  minister,  and  sub- 
mit to  be  instructed,  if  he  or  she  were  not  sufficiently 
informed  in  what  every  Christian  ought  to  know.1 

With  the  policy  or  justice  of  these  laws  I  am  not 
now  concerned.  I  cite  them  merely  as  proofs  of  the 
course  that  was  taken  to  carry  out  the  system  of  the 
English  Church,  and  be  identical  with  it. 

In  1621-2,  met  the  first  Legislature  in  Virginia, 
and  "  among  the  first  enactments  were  those  which 
concerned  the  Church."  "  The  general  provisions " 
above  recited,  "  were  embodied  in  a  statutory  form," 
and  provision  was  made  by  law  for  the  support  of  the 
Clergy.2 

Soon  after  this  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  a 
small  number  of  Puritans  came  to  the  colony;  but 
their  number  was  too  inconsiderable  to  produce  any 
change  in  the  religion  of  the  colony,  and  public  wor- 
ship continued  to  be  conducted  as  it  always  had  been, 
in  conformity  with  the  ritual  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land.3 

In  1628,  Lord  Baltimore,  father  to  the  Lord  Balti- 
more who  settled  in  Maryland,  visited  Virginia.  The 
Legislative  Assembly  was  in  session,  and  as  he  was 
known  to  be  a  Papist,  they  required  that  he  should 
take  the   oath  of  supremacy  and  allegiance,  but  he 

1  Hawks'  Narrative,  pp.  25-27.      2  Hawks,  p.  35.      3  Ibid.  p.  35. 


VK]  CHURCH   m   THE   UNITED   STATES.  283 

refused.  This  act,  whether  right  or  wrong,  in  itself, 
shows,  and  is  cited  to  show  the  strictness,  with  which 
the  Virginia  settlers  adhered  to  the  English  Church. 

In  1642,  however,  Puritan  discontent  had  gone  so 
far  as  to  make  application  to  the  General  Court  of 
Massachusetts  to  send  ministers  of  that  order  to  Vir- 
ginia, "  that  the  inhabitants  might  be  privileged  with 
the  preaching  and  ordinances  of  Jesus  Christ."1 

It  will  be  remembered  that  notwithstanding  the 
Puritan  insinuation,  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel 
and  the  administration  of  Christian  Ordinances  accord- 
ing to  the  English  Church,  was  established  and  abun- 
dantly provided  for  in  Virginia.  Dr.  Hawks2  re- 
marks, "  that  it  is  possible,  and  indeed  probable,  that 
the  application  was  suggested  by  some  of  those  who 
had  emigrated  from  New  England  two  years  before, 
and  sought  a  home  in  the  southern  colonies." 

Thus  it  appears  that  the  Puritans  were  not  content 
with  having  everything  their  own  way  in  their  own 
colony,  but  they  must  intermeddle  with  the  more 
peaceable  and  harmonious  affairs  of  another  colony, 
and  cause  dissent  and  confusion  there. 

The  historian,  to  whom  we  are  already  so  much 
indebted,  adds,  '<  Up  to  the  period  of  Harvey's  arrival 
in  1029,  there  was  no  complaint.  The  colonists  were 
oontent  to  remain  in  the  bosom  of  that  Church  in 
which  tin  v  had  been  reared;  and  there  is  ample  evi- 
denoe  of  ;i  conscientious  and  «reneral  attachment  to  the 
faiih  which  whs  established." 

The  foregoing  aooounl  has  been  given  so  much  at 

'  Hawks,  p.  51.  2  p.  52.  «  p.  52. 


284  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

length,  for  the  purpose  of  showing  what  was  the  lead- 
ing design  of  the  first  settlers  in  these  States. 

$  4.  The  English   Church   continued   to 

The  Juris-  ° 

diction  of  take  charge  of  its  children  in  the  colonies — 
chmfh11^  to  make  provision  for  their  wants — and  to 
tinned  until  gather  in  the  wanderers  and  outcasts.     They 

the  Re  vol  u-  _..  .    .  -    ,, 

tion,  1776.  were  under  the  Diocesan  supervision  ot  the 
Bishop  of  London. 
I  need  not  go  into  a  detail  of  the  efforts  that  were 
made  to  introduce  Episcopacy  into  this  country,  be- 
fore the  Revolution  ;  nor  enumerate  the  special  acts  of 
supervision  and  fostering  care  which  were  manifested 
by  the  mother  Church.  I  will  rather  pass  on  to  the 
organization  of  the    Church   after  the   Revolutionary 

War. 

4  5.  Independence  was  declared  in  1776, 

The  Church  " 

in  the  united  and  peace  made  by  the  acknowledgement  of 
eTal  TnTe^ our  separate  national  existence,  in  1783. 
pendent  exis-  Tjp  i0  that  period  this  country  was  a  part  of 
the  English  dominions  and  dependencies. 
And  when  the  connection  with  the  mother  country 
was  severed,  the  Church  which  she  had  planted  be- 
came independent  also. 

As  early  as  August,  1782 — that  is,  before  the  re- 
cognition of  the  national  independence  by  England — 
a  scheme  was  proposed  for  the  organization  of  the 
"  Church  of  England  people"  into  an  independent 
branch  of  the  Church,  by  themselves.  This  scheme, 
however,  was  purely  an  individual  proposal,  and  re- 
sulted in  nothing.  It  is  indeed  doubtful,  whether  if 
it  had  been  carried  into  effect,  the  religious  associa- 
tion which  would  have  been  the  result,  would  have 


VIL1  CHURCH   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES.  285 

been  recognized  by  the  Church  of  England,  or  any- 
other  branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  as  a  part  of  that 
Church.  And  it  is  certain  that  the  author  of  this  pro- 
posal— the  venerable  Bishop  White — afterwards  re- 
pudiated some  of  the  fundamental  points  which  were 
understood  to  be  combined  in  it. 

§  6.   The  first   measure  towards  comple-     The  firJst 

1  steps  towards 

ting  the  organization  of  a  Church  in  Ameri-  an  organiza- 
ca  identical  with  the  English  Church,  was 
taken  in  Connecticut,  in  March  1783,  when  at  a  meet- 
ing of  the  Clergy  of  the  State,  the  Rev.  Samuel 
Seabury,  D.  D.  was  elected  Bishop  for  the  Church  in 
that  State. 

I  do  not  however  dwell  upon  this  fact  at  length, 
for  two  reasons :  first  it  was  onlv  local  in  its  character, 
and  did  not  profess  to  aim  at  anything  beyond  the 
single  Diocese  of  Connecticut :  and  secondly,  because 
B  single  Diocese  is  not  competent  to  an  independent 
existence  as  a  branch  of  the  Church.  There  must  be, 
at  the  least,  "two  or  three"  Bishops  and  Dioceses  in 
order  to  enable  them  to  perform  all  the  functions 
requisite  to  their  existence — the  ordination  of  Bishops 
for  instance. 

But  on  the  13th  of  November,  1783,  the  Rr:v.  Dr. 
White,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Pennsylvania,  having 
previously  consulted  with  the  other  Clergy  of  that 
eity,  proposed  lor  consideration,  at  a  meeting  of  the 
vestry  of  his  parish,  the  appointment  of  committees 
from  the  different  city  vestries,  to  confer  with  the 
Clergy  <ui  the  subject  of  forming  a  representative  body 
of  the  ( 'hurohea  in  Pennsj  Ivania. 

These  Committees  met  with  the  Clergy  on  March 


286  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

29th,  1784.  Another  meeting  was  called  for  May  in 
the  same  year,  and  a  Committee  was  appointed  to 
confer  with  the  Churches  in  other  states. 

A  few  days  afterwards  a  meeting,  for  another  pur- 
pose, of  several  Clergymen  from  New- York,  New-Jer- 
sey, and  Pennsylvania,  was  held  at  New-Brunswick, 
New-Jersey.  The  proceedings  of  the  Philadelphia 
meeting  were  communicated  to  them,  and  it  was 
determined  to  call  a  fuller  meeting  in  New- York,  on 
the  5th  of  October  following.  At  this  convention  there 
were  delegates  from  Massachusetts,  Connecticut, 
New-York,  New- Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Delaware, 
Maryland,  and  Virginia. 

At  the  meeting  in  Philadelphia,  March  1784,  the 
following  basis  of  a  general  organization  was  propo- 
sed. It  was  also  brought  to  the  notice  of  the  meeting 
in  New  Brunswick,  in  the  May  following,  and  was 
adopted  by  the  First  General  Convention  that  was 
duly  called,  viz  :  September  1785.1 

"  1.  That  the  Episcopal  Church  is,  and  ought  to 
be,  independent  of  all  foreign  authority,  ecclesiastical 
or  civil. 

"  2.  That  it  hath,  and  ought  to  have,  in  common 
with  all  other  religious  societies,  full  and  exclusive 
powers  to  regulate  the  concerns  of  its  own  commu- 
nion. 

"  3.  That  the  doctrines  of  the  Grospel  be  main- 
tained as  now  professed  by  the  Church  of  England, 
and  uniformity  of  worship  continued,  as  near  as  may 
be,  to  the  Liturgy  of  the  same  Church. 

1  Bioren's  Journals,  pp.  5,  6,  and  the  Preface,  by  Bp.  White. 


VII]  CHURCH   IN   THE   UNITED   STATES.  287 

"  4.  That  the  succession  of  the  ministry  be  agree- 
able to  the  usage  which  re  quire  th  the  three  Orders, 
Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons — that  the  rights  and 
powers  of  the  same,  respectively,  be  ascertained,  and 
that  they  be  exercised  according  to  reasonable  laws, 
to  be  duly  made. 

"  5.  That  to  make  Canons,  or  Laws,  there  be  no 
other  authority  than  that  of  a  representative  body  of 
the  Clergy  and  Laity,  conjointly. 

"  6.  That  no  powers  be  delegated  to  a  General 
Ecclesiastical  Government,  except  such  as  cannot 
conveniently  be  exercised  by  the  Clergy  and  Laity  in 
their  respective  congregations." 

At  the  meeting  in  New- York,  1784,  eight  different 
States  were  represented,  and  it  was  agreed  : — 

"1.  That  there  should  be  a  General  Convention 
of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of 
America. 

"  3.  That  the  said  Church  should  maintain  the 
doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  as  now  held  by  the  Church 
of  England,  and  adhere  to  the  Liturgy  of  the  said 
Church,  as  far  as  shall  be  consistent  with  the  Ameri- 
can Revolution  and  the  constitutions  of  the  several 
States." 

There  were  also  other  resolutions,  2,  4,  5,  and  6, 
providing  f<>r  a  General  Convention,  and  its  meeting, 
which  was  to  be  held  in  Philadelphia  on  the  27th  of 
September  following. 

This  may  perhaps  be  regarded  as  the  organization 
of  the  Churofa  in  this  oonntry.  It  took  t<»  itself  tho 
naiiir,  u Protestant  Episcopal  " — Protestant,  to  denote 


288  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

its  freedom  from  Popery,  and  Episcopal,  to  denote  its 
adherence  to  the  Apostolic  Ministry. 

It  may  be  well  to  notice,  particularly,  that  this 
was  not  called,  nor  regarded  as,  the  commencement 
of  the  Church  in  this  country.  The  Clergy  and  Laity 
came  together,  only  to  provide  for  some  deficiences  in 
their  organization.  The  Church  had  been  founded 
here  in  1607,  by  the  Jamestown  colonists.  And  now 
that  a  separation  from  the  mother  country  had  been 
effected,  by  the  Revolutionary  War,  they  came  to- 
gether to  provide  for  those  ministrations  and  elements 
of  growth  and  edification  for  which,  until  that  event, 
they  had  depended  upon  the  mother  Church,  and  the 
mother  country. 

It  may  be  well,  however,  to  show  from  the  records 
of  those  times,  that  this  was  not  regarded  by  those 
who  took  part  in  the  transactions,  as  the  origin  or  first 
establishment  of  the  Church  in  this  country.  Thus, 
on  the  second  day  of  the  Convention,  it  was  Resolved, 
that  the  testimonials  produced  from  the  Churches  in 
the  several  States are  satisfactory. l 

Here  the  Church  is  spoken  of  as  an  existing  body, 
and  as  one,  though  distributed  through  many  states; 
and  that  too,  before  any  formal  constitution  had  been 
adopted,  a  Liturgy  provided,  or  the  Episcopate  ob- 
tained. 

Again,  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  the  Pro- 
testant Episcopal  Church  was  not  spoken  of  as  the  ori- 
gin of  that  Church  ;  the  Preamble  to  the  Constitution 
as  reported  by  a  Committee,  reads — "  "Whereas,  in  the 

1   BlOREN,  p.  5. 


VII.J  CHURCH    IN   THE    UNITED   STATES.  289 

course  of  Divine  Providence,  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  United  States  of  America,  is  become 
independent  of  all  foreign  authority,"  &c.  It  also 
spoke  of  meetings  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies  of  the 
said  Church  previously  held. 

These  expressions  are  quoted  to  show  that  the 
men  of  those  times  did  not  consider  the  Church  in  this 
country  as  originating  with  themselves,  but  that  they 
did  consider  that  it  had  been  in  existence  as  a  Church 
before  their  time. 

The  address  to  the  English  Archbishop  and  Bishops, 
is  also  worthy  of  being  referred  to  for  its  bearing  on 
several  important  points  now  before  us.  The  Conven- 
tion call  themselves  "the  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  sundry  of  the 
United  States  of  America."  They  say,  "Our  fathers, 
when  they  left  the  land  of  their  nativity,  did  not  leave 
the  bosom  of  that  Church  over  which  your  lordships 
now  preside  ;  but,  as  well  from  a  veneration  for  Epis- 
copal government,  as  from  an  attachment  to  the  admi- 
rable services  of  our  Liturgy,  continued  in  willing 
connection  with  their  Ecclesiastical  Superiors  in  Eng- 
land, and  were  subjected  to  many  inconveniences 
rather  than  break  the  unity  of  the  Church  to  which 
I 'hr  //  belonged, 

"  When  it  pleased  the  Supreme  Ruler  of  the  Uni- 
verse, tli.it  this  pari  <>f*  the  British  Empire  should  bo 
free,  sovereign  and  independent,  it  became  the  most 
important  concern  of  the  members  of  our  oommunion 
*o  provide  for  its  coni inua  nce.M 

1  BlOftl  n,  p.  12,  13. 

13 


290  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Crap. 

TheOrgani-  $  7.  The  leading  objects  which  claimed 
pleted  °0m"  *ne  attention  of  the  Convention  of  1785,  were 
(1)  a  more  complete  system  of  union  and 
organization  for  the  whole  country  (2) — the  preparation 
of  the  Liturgy,  and  (3)  the  obtaining  of  the  Episco- 
pate. 

The  Constitution  reported  to  that  Convention  was 
adopted,  with  some  modification,  on  the  26th  of  June 
the  next  year,  1786.1 

Before  this  time,  however,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Samuel 
Seabury  had  been  consecrated  Bishop  of  Connecticut, 
at  Aberdeen,  in  Scotland,  on  the  14th  of  November, 
1784,  by  three  Scotch  Bishops.  The  reason  of  his 
being  consecrated  in  Scotland,  rather  than  in  Eng- 
land, is  to  be  found  in  the  fact,  that  the  English  Bish- 
ops were  restrained,  by  a  law  of  Parliament,  (not  of 
the  Church,)  from  consecrating  any  Bishops,  without 
certain  oaths  which  could  be  taken  only  by  English- 
men. 

The  Convention  of  1785,  however,  made  applica- 
tion to  England  for  the  consecration  of  Bishops  there. 
After  a  series  of  events,  which  need  not  here  be  re- 
cited in  particular,  an  act  of  Parliament  was  obtained 
for  the  purpose,  and  the  Rev.  Dr.  Provoost,  of  New- 
York,  and  the  Rev.  Dr.  White,  of  Pennsylvania,  were 
consecrated,  in  the  Lambeth  Palace,  February  4, 
1787.  And  on  the  19th  of  September,  1790,  the  Rev. 
Dr.  James  Madison  was  ordained  Bishop  for  Virginia, 
at  Lambeth,  in  England,  by  English  Bishops. 

The  Church  in  America  had  now  four  Bishops — a 

1  Bioren,  pp.  22,  23,  24. 


VIL]  CHURCH   W   THE   UNITED   STATES.  291 

number,  according  to  the  uniform  usages  and  princi- 
ples of  the  Church,  competent  to  perform  all  the  func- 
tions requisite  to  an  independent  branch,  or  Provincial 
Church. 

In  1789,  the  General  Convention  met  for  the  first 
time  with  a  full  organization.  The  Bishops  now  con- 
stituted a  separate  house.  A  new  Constitution  was 
adopted,  and  the  Prayer-Book,  as  revised,  was  set 
forth,  to  be  used  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  Octo- 
ber, 1790.  The  Ratification  bears  date,  October  16, 
1789. 

$  8.  The  settlement  at  Jamestown  was        The  Set_ 

.-,       r  i  i  n  tlementat 

the  first  that  was  made  at  all,  by  any  Chris-  Jamestown 
tian  people,  within  the  limits  of  what  was  the  con8idered  in 

__    .  relation  to  the 

United  States,  when  they  became  an  inde-  General  pr&*- 
pendent  nation.  7T  of  th! 

*  Ext  ension  of 

In  this  there  was  an  exact   compliance  the  Chur<*- 
with  the  terms  and  principles  of  the  extension  of  the 
Church,  of  which  we  have  already  spoken. 

1.  The  settlers  were  members  of  the  Church,  from 
the  English  Branch. 

2.  They  came  into  a  country  (the  English  posses- 
sions of  North  America,)  at  that  time  unoccupied  by 
any  other  branch  of  the  Church, — 

>\.  For  ilif  purpose  of  establishing  here  "the  true 
Word  and  Service  of  God." 

Thai  all  these  conditions  were  fulfilled,  Is  a  mat- 
ter of  fact.  The  design  <>f  the  settlers,  however,  was 
not  exclusively  religious.  They  did  Dot  oome  here  for 
the  sole  purpose  of  converting  the  heathen.  They 
claimed  the  territory   f<>r  their  own,  and  designed  to 

found  a  colony,  as  well  a>  a   Cliureh,   which  ahould  be 


292  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

a  part  of  the  Church  and  the  nation  to  which  they  be- 
longed. This,  however,  cannot  invalidate  the  mission- 
ary character  of  their  undertaking. 

Thus,  in  the  most  general  view — considering  this 
western  continent  as  unoccupied  country — we  find 
that  the  commencement  of  these  English  missionaries 
was  such  as  to  identify  their  communion  with  the 
English  Church,  and  was  no  violation  of  the  rights  or 
claims  of  any  other  branch  of  the  Church. 

The  settle-        §  9.  But   there   is  still  another  light  in 
L'EnTnih  which  this  matter  ought  to  be  placed. 
Dominions.  From  its  first  discovery,  some  part  of  this 

continent  was    acknowledged   to  belong  to  England. 
Virginia,  and  Jamestown — the  place  of  the  first  Eng- 
lish settlement — were  within  those  limits.     This  fact 
must  be  considered  as  giving  the  English  Church  a 
peculiar  right  and   claim  here.     The  territory  was  a 
part  of  the  English  dominions.     Hence  this  country — 
as  a  part  of  the  English  Domain — was  a  part  of  Eng- 
land— as  much  so  as  though  it  had  been  within  the 
Island  that  is  called  by  that  name.     Hither  English- 
men might  come  and   settle,  with  all  the  rights  and 
privileges  of  Englishmen,  subject  to  the  laws  of  Eng- 
land, and  entitled  to  claim  her  protection.     The  right 
to  bring  their  religion  and  the  peculiarities  of  their 
worship  with  them,  will  not  therefore  be  questioned. 
And  as  these  colonies  were   a  part   of   the   English 
dominions,   so    also    those    members   of  the   English 
Church,  who  came  hither  did  not   lose  their  member- 
ship, or  transfer  it  to  another  communion,  by  their  re- 
moval.    They  were  a  part  of  the  English  Church  still. 
It  is,  indeed,  true  that  Royal  Authority  gave  grants 


VII.]  CHURCH    IN   THE    UNITED    STATES.  293 

to  others  of  its  subjects,  who  had  forsaken  the  com- 
munion of  the  English  Church,  to  come  and  settle  on 
this  continent  also.  But  something  more  than*King's 
patents,  and  Parliamentary  grants,  are  necessary,  to 
enable  persons  to  found  a  branch  of  the  Church  of 
Christ.  He  is  the  Sovereign  of  His  Earthly  Kingdom, 
and  its  Colonies  must  be  founded  by  grants  obtained 
from  Him,  and  in  conformity  with  His  laws  and  insti- 
stutions. 

King  Charles,   or  any  other   English   King  could 
confer    ample    authority  for   founding    colonies    that 
should  be  a  part  of  his  dominions  and  kingdom.     But 
he  had  no  such  authority  over  the  Kingdom  of  Christ. 
Of  course  I  am  not  denying  the  right  of  the  Eng- 
lish Puritans,  and   other   seceders   from    the  English 
Church,  to  come  and   settle   in   this  country.     So  far 
as  man,  or  human  authority  is  concerned,  their  right 
was  unquestionable.     But  although  they  had  a  right 
to  settle  here,  and  to  have  what  religion  they  pleased, 
or  none,  if  that  had  been  their  choice  ;  still,  however, 
the  relation  of  their  ecclesiastical  institutions  to  the 
identity  of  t 1n-  Church  could  not   be  changed   by   the 
peculiarities   of  their  location.       They  were   persons 
whose  consciences  had  compelled  them  to  leave  the 
English  Church,  and  they  came  here,  not  to  establish 
the  Church  in  which  they  had  found   that  they  could 
not    live,   at   home,    hut   to  extend    the  communion  ..f 
thai  which   they   had   themselves  founded.     It  waSj 
therefore,  im  more  a  part  and   branch  of  thai   which 
had  always  been  known  as  the  Churoh  of  England, 
when  established  in  this  country,  than  it  was  in  that 
which  the\  hi't  in  order  to  oome  here. 


294  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

ThisPrinci-  §  10.  The  principle  on  which  these  re- 
an ducted  marks  are  based  is  recognized  and  practised 
upon  in  aii  Up0n,  every  day,  in    this   rapidly    growing 

similar  cases.    _»..,-.  /.  ,  , 

Republic.  Emigrants  are  going  from  the 
States  in  which  the  religious  institutions  are  estab- 
lished on  a  well-understood  basis,  into  new  territories. 
Some  of  them  are  of  one  religion,  and  some  of  another. 
They  locate  and  form  themselves  into  churches,  as 
they  choose.  Those  who  were  Presbyterians  here, 
and  organize  on  the  Presbyterian  platform  there,  are 
regarded  as  a  part  of  the  Presbyterian  church  still. 
So  with  every  other  denomination.  It  is  not  supposed, 
or  held,  that  their  ecclesiastical  identity  is  changed 
by  the  change  of  location.  If  they  adopt  different 
views,  and  a  different  organization,  then,  of  course, 
they  will  become  a  different  church,  or  at  least  a  part 
of  a  different  one:  but  not  otherwise. 

So  with  the  first  settlers  in  this  country.  It  was 
a  part  of  the  English  dominions — and  the  settlers 
were  Englishmen,  going  from  one  part  of  the  English 
dominions  to  another  ;  neither  changing  nor  intend- 
ing to  change  either  their  civil  allegiance  or  their 
Church-communion  and  membership. 

Until  the  colonies  became  a  separate  nation,  by  the 
Revolution,  they  were  considered  a  part  of  the  Eng 
lish  Church.  The  others  that  came  here  were  also 
considered  as  belonging  to  the  same  church,  or  com- 
munion, as  that  to  which  they  belonged  on  the  other 
side  of  the  great  waters,  and  sustained  the  same  rela- 
tion to  the  English  Church  here  as  they  had  sustained 
there. 

With  regard  to  the  immigrants  from  other  coun- 


VII]  CHURCH   DJ"   THE  UNITED   STATES.  295 

tries,  they  were  of  two  classes :  those  which  came  to 
parts  of  this  continent  then  belonging  to  England,  and 
those  who  came  to  parts  belonging  to  their  native 
countries — as  the  Spanish,  in  Florida,  and  the  Dutch, 
in  New- York.  The  case  of  these  last  will  be  consid- 
ered by  and  by.  But  those  who  came  to  settle  in  the 
English  colonies  became  thereby  subjects  of  the  Eng- 
lish crown,  and  therefore  stand  on  the  same  footings  in 
relation  to  the  object  now  under  consideration,  as  Eng- 
lishmen themselves. 

§  11.  Thus  it  appears  that  the  Protestant        The  *"> 

.  testant  E  p  i  9- 

Episcopal  Church  was  founded  in  this  coun-  copai  church 
try,  then  a  part  of  the  English  dominions,  by  i£3£ 
members — missionaries  and  colonists — fromChurch  of 
the  Church  of  England,  with  the  concur-  thesumeCom- 
rence  and  approbation  of  that  Church,  and  mumon- 
under  its  fostering  care.  That  it  is  a  branch  of  the 
English  Church,  is,  therefore,  a  matter  that  admits  of 
no  doubt. 

The  fact,  that  the  English  Church  consecrated  for 
th.  in  the  number  of  Bishops  required  by  the  universal 
practice  of  the  Church,  to  constitute  an  independent 
Provincial  Branch,  is  proof  that  they  acknowledged 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  this  country  as  a 
part  0!  their  own  communion.  Beside  this,  there  has 
always  been  a  free  communion  and  good  understand- 
ing between  them.  Until  quite  lately  there  has  been, 
however,  a  law  of  the  English  Parliament  excluding 
from  the  pulpits  of  the  English  Church  all  Clergymen 
who  had  not  mad.-  certain  declarations  equivalent  to 
an  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  English  Government 
Tlu-,  of  oourse,  our   Ministers   had    net   done,   and 


296  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

oould  not  do.  Therefore,  they  were  excluded,  by  a 
Parliamentary  regulation.  This  law  was  repealed  in 
1840.  But  the  validity,  and  regularity  of  our  minis- 
trations have  always  been  recognized  and  allowed  by 
the  English  Church,  and  our  Clergy  (now  that  the 
political  obstacle  is  removed)  are  received  to  preach 
in  their  pulpits,  and  to  minister  at  their  altars :  and 
members  going  from  the  Church  in  this  country  are 
received  to  communion  there,  simply  on  a  certificate 
of  their  having  been  admitted  to  communion  here,  and 
so,  vice  versa,  they  are  received  in  this  country. 

These  facts  prove  identity  of  communion  between 
the  two  Churches. 

Though  hardly  anything  more  can  be  necessary 
on  the  point  of  our  unity  and  identity  with  the  English 
Church,  yet  I  will  quote  the  declaration  made  by  the 
House  of  Bishops,  in  this  country,  May  20,  1814: — 

"  It  having  been  credibly  stated  to  the  House  of 
Bishops,  that,  on  questions  in  reference  to  property 
devised,  before  the  Revolution,  to  congregations  be- 
longing to  the  Church  of  England,  and  to  uses  con- 
nected  with  that  name,  some  doubts  have  been  enter- 
tained in  regard  to  the  identity  of  the  body  to  which 
the  two  names  have  been  applied,  the  House  think  it 
expedient  to  make  the  declaration,  and-  to  request  the 
concurrence  of  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Depu- 
ties therein,  That  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  the  United  States  of  America  is  the  same  body 
heretofore  known  in  these  States  by  the  name  of  the 
Church  of  England  ;  the  change  of  name,  although 
not  of  religious  principle,  in  doctrine,  or  in  worship,  or 
in  discipline,  being  induced  by  a  characteristic  of  the 


VIL]  CHURCH   IN  THE  UNITED   STATES.  297 

Church  of  England,  supposing  the  independence  of 
Christian  Churches  under  the  different  sovereignties 
to  which,  respectively,  their  allegiance  in  civil  con- 
cerns belongs."  This  declaration  was  concurred  in 
by  the  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies.1 

§  12.   During  the  course  of  the  preceding        The 

y  n  .        Nationality  of 

sections,  I  have  often  had  occasion  to  desig-  churches. 
nate  Churches  by  the  name  of  the  country  in 
winch  they  are  located — implying  thereby  some  sort  of 
a  connection  between  the  Churches  and  the  States. 

The  subject  demands  a  few  words  of  explanation; 
and  we  have  now  arrived  at  a  point  in  our  investiga- 
tion, where  a  due  consideration  of  that  relation  will 
be  of  material  assistance. 

By  the  nationality  of  Churches,  I  do  not  mean  any 
recognition  of  the  Church,  as  a  legal  establishment 
by  the  State.  The  idea  that  I  wish  to  use  is  equally 
consistent  with  all  possible  relations  between  the 
Church  and  State.  Whether,  as  in  the  Roman  Em- 
pire in  the  second  century,  the  State  persecutes  and 
opposes  the  Church;  or  whether,  as  in  England,  it 
supports  it  by  law;  or  whether,  as  in  this  country,  it 
leaves  the  Church  to  itself,  neither  opposing  nor  sup- 
porting it;  or  finally,  whether,  as  in  Scotland,  it  estab- 
lishes a  rivifl  Sect — the  doctrine  which  I  wish  to 
make  use  of,    is  equally  consistent  with  that  relation. 

Wnere,  as  in  the  nations  of  the  old  continent,  there 
is  a  Governing  Class  consisting  of  persons  who  are 

born  to  authority,  live  in  its  exercise,  and    leave    it    to 
their  heirs  as  an  heritage  when  they  die — my  opinion 

1     \\llin'>     Mmtni /\s\  | > | ).   !  i7.        AI.SO,     IiH>Kl..\'s    JqUVHUU  Of  tk$ 

■  ral  <  '"ii r> ntion,  \>>\.  i.  pp.  810,  811. 

L3* 


298  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

• 

is,  that  they  are  bound,  and  must,  if  they  will  regard 
their  own  welfare,  make  the  Religion  of  Christ  a  part 
of  the  law  of  their  dominions.1  This,  of  course,  im- 
plies a  support  of  the  Church  and  its  institutions. 

But,  in  this  country,  where  we  have  no  such  gov- 
erning class,  but  only  a  number  of  citizens  called  for 
a  time  to  execute  the  people's  will  in  relation  to  certain 
matters  of  a  more  general  concern,  no  such  incorpora- 
tion of  Christianity,  its  doctrines  and  institutions,  into 
the  laws  of  the  land,  can  well  be  made.  The  People, 
who  are  the  government  themselves,  yield  their  sup- 
port to  religion  in  another  way,  and  thus  perform, 
without  the  intervention  of  the  state  authorities,  what 
the  nations  differently  constituted  can  perform  only  by 
a  union  of  Church  and  State. 

But  the  duty  of  "  nations "  and  "  kingdoms  " 
toward  the  Church  is  not  the  subject  which  I  wish 
now  to  present  to  the  consideration  of  my  readers.  It 
is  rather  the  fact,  that  the  territorial  limits  of  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Church  are  commensurate  with 
those  of  the  nation  in  which  it  is  situated.  This  is 
what  I  mean  by  the  nationality  of  Churches. 

scripture         $  13.    There    are    several    considerations 
Reasons  for  derivable  from  Scripture  which  confirm  this 

such  a    Rela- 
tion, idea. 

1.  It  is  obvious  that  the  Apostles,  in  locating  the 
different  and  independent  branches  of  the  Church,  had 
regard  to  the  political  divisions  of  the  world,  as  has 
been  already  stated. 

2.  It  is  evident  that  the  members  of  the  Church,  as 

1  Isaiah  Lx.  12. 


VILJ  CHURCH    IN   THE    UNITED    STATES.  299 

Christians',  owe  some  duties  to  the  government  that  is 
over  them,  and  to  their  governors,  such  as  are  incom- 
patible with  any  allegiance  or  obedience  to  persons  or 
governors  out  of  the  nation  in  which  they  live.  Hence 
it    has   been    held,  by   thoughtful   Christians,  that  a 
belief  in  the  Papal  Supremacy  by  persons  in  nations 
that   are  politically   independent  of  Rome,  is  incon- 
sistent with  due  allegiance  to  the  national  sovereignty. 
3.   But  again.    In  a  Christian  country,  the  govern- 
ment or  administration  must  come  into  either  concur- 
rence or  collision  with  the  Church  and  her  regulations 
in  regard  to  some  points.   Even  in  this  country,  where 
there  is  the  least   possible  amount  of  connection  be- 
tween Church  and  State — some  points  are  assumed^ 
ami  must  of  necessity  be  assumed,  by  the  State.     For 
instance,  the  officers  employed  in  the  administration 
musl   either  keep  or   violate  the   Christian    Sabbath. 
And  the  nation  must  have  a  law  upon  the  subject.     If 
that  law   regards    the   day   as   holy,  then,  in    so  far  it 
adopts  the  doctrine  of  the  Church:   if  not,  then  it  may 
requirej  and  in  some  eases  it  will  require  its  citizens, 
if  they  are  members  of   the  Church,  to  violate   their 
consciences    by   continuing    in    seoular    occupations 
winch  the  laws  have  required  regardless  of  the  day. 
The  laws  <»!'  onr  country  recognise   this  day,  notwith- 
standing the,   many    .lews,  Seventh-Day    Baptists  and 
infidels,  who  differ  from  the  Church  in  their  religion 
on  i In-  point     Our  Congress,  also,  adjourn  for  Christ- 
mas and  the  Holy  Days  oonneoted  therewith,  notwith- 
standing the  fact  thai  neither  Presbyterians,  nor  Bap- 
tists, in » r  Methodists — the  most   numerous  denomina- 
tions in  our  country — regard   them  as  Holy   hays  at 


Q 


00  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 


all.  On  the  subject  of  marriage  and  divorce,  both  the 
Church  and  the  State  must  have  laws  which  will  be 
either  concurrent  or  contradictory. 

With  regard  to  many  of  these  things,  the  Scrip- 
tures have  left  the  Church  to  make  her  own  laws  and 
arrangements  for  the  mere  circumstantials.  If,  now, 
the  Church  and  the  nation  are  co-extensive  and  con- 
terminous, there  will  be  no  difficultv  in  securing  an 
harmonious  arrangement  between  them.  But  if  there 
were  parts  of  several  different  and  independent 
Churches,  or  the  whole  of  them  within  the  limits  of 
the  same  State,  it  would  be  impossible  to  adapt  the 
jaws  so  as  to  harmonize  with  them  all. 

This  Prin-  $  14.  When  the  Church  was  first  planted, 
^the^Primi1-  regard  was  nad,  as  we  have  repeatedly  seen, 
tive  church,  to  the  secular  and  political  divisions  of  the 
earth,  so  as  that  there  should  never  be  two  different 
Churches  or  ecclesiastical  authorities  in  the  same  di- 
vision. And  in  following  down  the  history  of  the 
Church  for  several  centuries,  we  find  this  rule  to  have 
been  pretty  carefully  adhered  to. 

"  This  may  be  evidenced  both  from  the  rules  and 
canons,  and  known  practice  of  the  Church  ;  for  when 
any  provinces  were  divided  in  the  State,  then  common- 
ly followed  a  division  in  the  Church  also;  and  when 
any  city  was  advanced  to  a  greater  dignity  in  the  civil 
account  it  usually  obtained  a  like  promotion  in  the 
ecclesiastical.  It  was  by  this  rule  that  the  Bishop  of 
Constantinople  was  advanced  to  Patriarchal  power  in 
the  Church,  who  before  was  not  so  much  as  a  Metro- 
politan, but  subject  to  the  Primate  of  Heraclea  in 
Thrace  ;  and  this  very  reason  is  given  by  two  genera] 


VILJ  CHURCH   IN   THE   UNITED    STATES.  301 

Counclis,  which  confirmed  him  in  the  possession  of 
this  newly  acquired  power It  sometimes  hap- 
pened that  an  ambitious  spirit  would  petition  the  Em- 
peror to  grant  him  the  honor  and  power  of  a  Metropo- 
litan in  the  Church,  when  yet  the  province  to  which 
he  belonged  had  but  one  metropolis  in  the  State ; 
which  was  so  contrary  to  the  aforesaid  rale  of  the 
Church  that  the  Great  Council  of  Chalcedon,  made  it 
deposition  for  any  Bishop  to  attempt  it.  But,  on  the 
other  hand,  if  the  Emperor  thought  fit  to  divide  a 
province  into  two,  and  erect  a  new  metropolis  in  the 
second  part,  then  the  Church  allowed  the  Bishop  of 
the  new  metropolis  to  become   Metropolitan   in    the 

Church  also The  canons   of  the  Church  were 

made  to  favor  this  practice  in  the  erection  of  new 
Bishoprics  also ;  for  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  has 
another  canon  which  says,  that  if  the  Imperial  power 
madeanv  innovation  in  the  precincts  or  parishes  belong- 
ing to  a  city,  then  the  Church  precincts  might  be  alter- 
ed in  conformity  to  the  alterations  that  were  made  in 
the  political  and  civil  state,  which  canon  is  repeated 
and  confirmed  in  the  Council  of  Trullo." 

$  \>~).    I  am  aware  that  this  rule  is  not  one      TlH'  Pr'"" 

dple  not  to  bo 

of  necessity,  and  that  history  presents  many  denied  oa  eo- 

mi  i         -c  i.i  i     count    of   tlio 

exceptions  to   it.      1  he  rule,  if  strictly  ad-  |MMWIt>lMWI. 

hered  to,  would    present  serious  difficulties  ,n:l1  Ml"'   ,,f 

(he  Church. 

in   times  ot    general  commotion,  when  the 
boundaries  of  Empires  and  Kingdoms  are  subject   to 
sudden  and  frequenl  ohanges.    Still,  however,  the  evils 

with  which   the  present  divided  Mute   of  Christendom 

'   1!im;iiam's  Atitiijuifiis,  P."ok  ix„  0  1,  ?'  V 


302  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

would  embarrass  the  application  of  the  principle, 
ought  not  to  be  urged  against  its  soundness :  for  those 
divisions  and  their  causes  are  themselves  anomalies 
and  evils  which  ought  not  to  exist.  We  have  no  right, 
therefore,  to  expect  the  rules  and  principles  of  the 
Church  to  be  such  as  to  sanction  and  perpetuate 
thern. 

If,  for  instance,  any  part  of  Canada  should  become 
politically  incorporated  with  the  United  States — the 
Church  in  that  part  would  find  no  difficulty  in  coming 
into  our  General  Convention,  and  becoming  incorpor- 
ated with  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  this 
country,  for  the  reason  that  there  is  no  material  differ- 
ence between  us  and  them  in  matters  of  religion.  But 
if  we  should  acquire  a  part  of  Mexico,  inhabited  by  a 
Church  in  the  Roman  Obedience — the  incorporation 
would  be  more  difficult,  and  probably  in  fact  would  not 
take  place — so  great  is  the  difference  between  us  and 
them.  But  yet  this  should  be  no  objection  to  the  rule 
laid  down :  for  such  a  difference  has  no  right  to  exist 
between  any  two  branches  of  the  Church.  It  is  itself 
a  wronof. 

This  Prin-  §  16.  But  the  practical  object  of  this  dis- 
ciple re  cog-  cussion  is  to  say — what  the  practice  of  all 

n  i  s  e  d      and  .  .  . 

acted  upon  by  sects  and  denominations  implies  and  presup- 
aii  the  De-  p08e8  nameiy  that  the  Branch  of  the  Church 

n  om  i  nations  •  '  J  7 

in  our  Coun-  which  has  the  right  to  existence  and  jurisdic- 
tion  in  any  nation  at  all,  has  a  right  to  juris- 
diction in  any  and  every  part  of  it,  and  throughout  the 
whole  extent  of  its  Domain. 

I  have  aimed,  in  what  I  have  said,  to  prove  the 
nationality  of  Churches  only  so  far  as  is  requisite  for 


VII]  URCH   IN   THE   UNITED    STATES.  303 

this  practical  conclusion.  And  that,  I  suppose,  I  have 
proved.  If  not,  who  shall  deny  it  ?  Surely  no  one 
without  condemning  himself.  There  is  not  a  church 
or  sect  in  this  country,  that  would  hesitate  to  extend 
itself  into  any  village,  town,  or  settlement,  where  it 
was  desired,  on  the  ground  that  some  other  church  or 
denomination  had  a  society  established  there.  The 
thins:  was  never  heard  of.  Not  a  denomination  doubts 
its  right  to  extend  its  communion  anywhere  within 
our  country.  Now  this  right  is  what  I  mean  by  the 
nationality  of  an  independent  Branch  of  the  Church. 
And  this  is  the  right  that  I  claim  for  the  Church  of 
Christ. 

Most  of  the  larger  denominations  in  our  country, 
do  not  hesitate  to  identify  themselves,  by  name,  with 
the  cm  miry.  I  believe  that  all  of  them  that  are  any 
ways  diffused  throughout  the  country,  or  ever  expect 
to  be  so  diffused,  do  so.  Thus  we  have  "The  Asso- 
ciate Presbyterian  Church  of  North  America"  "  The 
II'  formed  Protestant  Church  of  North  America" 
"(Sir limit  Reformed  Church  in  the  United  States" 
"  The  Central  Preformed  Synod  of  the  American  Lu- 

theran  Church  ""  The  Presbyterian  Church  of  the 
United  States  of  America"  fyc,  SfC.  Thus  in  some 
way  <>r  other,  every  denomination  recognises  the  na- 
tionality  of  their  church,  and  claims  the  right  to  ex- 
tend it  into  any  town  or  settlement  where  it  may  be 
desired. 

k    17.   The     Papi8ts   do    not    BO  distinctly      Ti.-  Papal 
,  -  .  disregard     >>f 

agnize  this  principle  in  Bome  oi  its  bear-  Ull.  principle 
Lngs,  while  in  others, they  arc  unbounded  in  iift'"'ml,,,i fur' 
their  arrogance.     They  claim  the  right  to 


304  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap- 

extend  their  jurisdiction  everywhere,  regardless  of 
others.  But  still  they  do  not  recognize  the  principle 
in  its  relation  to  the  independency  of  the  national 
Churches.  They  aim  rather  to  destroy  that  indepen- 
dence and  reduce  them  all  into  one  consolidated 
Hierarchy,  that  the  Papal  domination  may  thereby  be 
the  more  effectually  established,  or  unrestrained  in 
its  exercise.  And  while  on  the  one  hand,  the  uncer- 
tainty and  variations  of  the  boundaries  of  the  secular 
kingdoms  have  doubtless  done  much  to  uprear  and 
support  that  consolidation,  let  us  also  admit  that  the 
consolidation  itself  has  done  much  to  preserve  the 
nations  from  those  hostile  collisions  which  lead  to  dis- 
memberment and  overthrow. 

The  English  $  18.  But  the  Church  of  England  and 
and  American  our  0W11)  recognize  and  act  upon  this  princi- 
have  always'  pie.  Though  we  believe  the  Churches  of 
acted  with  a  ^ne  gas^  ^o  De  ignorant  and  degraded,  and 

conscious    re-  D  °  ' 

gard  to  this  those  in  the  Roman  Obedience  to  be  cor- 
"ucipf  rupj.  an(j  idolatrous,  we  make  no  effort  to 
establish  a  purer  Branch  of  the  Church  in  their 
midst.  I  say  this  with  a  full  knowledge  of  all  that 
has  been  done.  In  every  case,  that  might  have  the 
appearance  of  an  exception,  a  caution  has  been  ob- 
served, which,  whether  the  course  pursued  be  justifi- 
able or  not,  has  saved  them  from  the  violation  of  the 
letter  of  the  rule  laid  down.  Thus  when  the  English 
Bishop  Luscombe  resided  at  Paris,  he  claimed  no 
jurisdiction  over  the  citizens  of  France  or  the  Nether- 
lands, but  only  over  Englishmen  who  were  tempora- 
rily residing  in  those  countries.  The  present  Bishop 
of  Gribraltar  takes  his  name  from  a  point  of  land  be- 


VII]  CHURCH   m   THE   UNITED   STATES.  305 

longing  to  the  English,  but  he  exercises  jurisdiction 
over  persons  within  territory  belonging  to  the  Greek 
Church.  Yet  it  is  only  over  the  Englishmen  who 
are  residing  there.  So  with  Bishop  Southgate,  re- 
siding at  Constantinople.  He  is  an  American  Bishop, 
residing  within  the  limits  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Patriarch  of  Constantinople.  But  he  claims  and  ex- 
erciser jurisdiction  over  no  territory,  but  simply  and 
only  over  American  citizens  residing  there. 

In  the  latter  case,  the  object  is  purely  missionary 
— the  improvement  of  the  Church  as  it  now  exists, 
and  has  been  in  existence  there,  ever  since  St.  Andrew 
first  preached  the  Gospel  to  that  people.  But  with 
n-irard  to  the  two  British  Bishops  mentioned  above, 
the  fact  that  occasioned  the  necessity  of  the  anomaly 
is  urged  as  its  only  justification,  namely,  that  the 
Church  in  those  places  was  so  corrupt  that  the 
English  Church  could  not  recommend  or  willingly 
permit  her  members,  to  commune  with  it.  For  this 
reason,  an  English  Chaplaio  is  permitted  by  the  Eng- 
lish Chnroh  to  hold  services  according  to  her  Liturgy 
within  the  very  walls  of  Rome  itself.  Yet  in  all  these 
oases,  she  neither  claims  jurisdiction  over,  nor  pre- 
tends to  provide  for  any  but  her  own  children  in  their 
temporary  wanderings  from  their  home. 

The  same  adherence  to  this  principle  is  seen  in 
our  course  toward  Texas.  While  it  was  considered  a 
pari  of  Mexico,  we  took  no  measures  to  send  mission- 
aries  there,  or  to  establish  a  Church  Like  our  own. 
Bui  ^u  soon  as  ii  came  to  h<"  regarded  by  our  govern- 
ment as  an  independent  nation,  our  missionaries,  with 
a  truly  Apostolical  zeal,  and  with  the  approbation  and 


306  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

support  of  our  Church,  went  thither  to  establish  the 
Gospel  in  the  newly  erected- Republic.  And  until  the 
Annexation  of  Texas,  they  were  regarded  as  foreign 
Missions.  But  now  they  are.  placed  on  the  list  of 
"  Domestic  Missions,"  and  may  become  a  Diocese  and 
enter  into  the  General  Convention,  whenever  they 
choose  to  do  so,  and  can  comply  with  the  Constitu- 
tion and  Canons  of  our  Church. 

§  19.  The  application  of  this  principle, 
pie  applied  to  which  is  thus  seen  to  be  established,  no  less 
the    present  b    tke  gcriptures,  than  by  the  recognition 

Subject.  J  j     ci 

and  practice  of  all  Churches  and  Sects,  is 
serviceable  to  us  in  many  ways. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  others  settled  in  some  places 
in  the  United  States,  as  their  limits  were  in  1783, 
before  the  Church  of  England  had  made  a  settlement 
in  those  particular  places,  as  the  Puritans  in  Massa- 
chusetts, the  Dutch  Reformed  in  New- York,  the 
Q/uakers  in  Pennsylvania,  &c,  &c.  Yet,  inasmuch 
as  these  were  but  parts  of  the  country  in  which  the 
Church  of  England  was  established  before  those  Sects, 
her  claim  would  not  be  prejudiced  or  precluded  by 
their  settlements,  even  admitting  them  to  be  Branches 
of  the  Church  of  Christ. 

The  Roman  Catholics  settled  in  the  State  of  Mary- 
land before  the  members  of  the  Church  of  England 
settled  in  that  state,  though  not  until  twenty-six 
years  after  the  English  settlement  in  Virginia.  This 
gave  to  the  English  Church-settlement  priority  of 
claim  over  the  Romish. 

But  in  regard  to  all  these  settlements,  the  Romish 
— the  Congregational — the  Dutch  Reformed,  &c,  &c, 


VII]  CHURCH    W  THE   UNITED   STATES.  307 

it  is  to  be  observed  that  they  were  in  what  was  then, 
or  soon  after  became,  territory  belonging  to  the  En- 
glish Crown,  and  therefore  within  territory  which  the 
English  Church  had  a  right  to  occupy,  before  the  Re- 
volution of  1776;  nay,  was  bound  to  occupy  and  pro- 
vide for  as  soon  as  she  could. 

2.  But  again.  Since  the  organization  of  our  Grov- 
ernment,  we  have  acquired  territory  that  was  occu- 
pied before  our  acquisition  of  it,  as  for  instance,  Louis- 
iana, Florida,  and  parts  of  Mexico.  In  these  territo- 
ries, Churches  in  the  Roman  Obedience  had  made  a 
settlement,  and  though  there  was  no  independent 
or  Provincial  Church  in  any  of  those  territories, 
yet  the  Roman  exercise  of  jurisdiction  was  estab- 
lished there.  Belonging  as  they  did  to  Spain,  to 
France,  and  to  Mexico,  nations  in  which  the  Churches 
are  in  the  Roman  Obedience,  those  Churches  had  a 
right  to  extend  their  communion  within  their  borders. 

But  when  those  tracts  of  country  became  united 
to,  and  incorporated  with,  the  United  States,  the 
Christians  there  ought  to  have  come  into  the  commun- 
ion of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church — that  being 
the  Branch  of  Christ's  Visible  Church  holding  juris- 
diction in  this  country.  And  if  the  Churches  in  the 
Roman  Obedience  had  not  departed  from  their  original 
purity,  and  assumed  an  attitude^pf  schismatic  opposi- 
tion to  the  n>t  of  the  Church,  these  members  would 
undoubtedly  have  oome  into  union  with  us.  And 
theil  neglect  or  refusal  has  given  us  a  right  to  regard 
M  mill  ami  void,  theii  jurisdiet ion,  since  their  admis- 
sion to  the  Union;  and  to  extend  our  oommunion  into 
the  very  places  where  t heir's  w;is  before  established. 


308  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

We  do  not  become  schismatics  thereby.  On  the  con- 
trary,  they  are  the  schismatics  for  refusing  commun- 
ion and  unity  with  those,  with  whom,  by  the  Provi- 
dence of  Grod,  and  in  accordance  with  the  Scriptures, 
and  the  principles  of  the  Catholic  Church,  they  ought 
to  be  perfectly  united. 

I  am  aware  that  I  may  be  asked  if  I  should  give 
the  same  advice  in  a  reversal  of  the  circumstances  of 
the  case.  It  is  said  to  be  a  bad  rule  that  will  not  work 
both  ways. 

But  to  this  I  say,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  errors 
of  the  Romish  Church  have  no  right  to  exist  at  all, 
nor  be  encouraged  anywhere,  and  therefore  their  ex- 
istence is  no  valid  objection  to  any  rule  or  principle, 
whose  operations  would  lead  to  evil  results  in  conse- 
quence of  the  existence  of  those  errors. 

In  the  second  place,  I  remark,  that  no  case  has  yet 
occurred  in  which  a  portion  of  country  in  which  a  Re- 
formed Branch  of  the  Church  had  canonical  jurisdic- 
tion, has  been  brought  under  the  jurisdiction  of  a  Pa- 
pal country  in  temporal  things.  But  if  such  a  thing 
should  happen,  I  could  of  course  no  more  recommend 
the  inhabitants  of  the  conquered  territory  to  conform 
to  the  peculiarities  of  Popery,  than  I  could  encourage 
or  recommend  those  now  living  in  Papal  countries  to 
conform  to  them.  ^Ve  must  always  obey  Grod  rather 
than  man  ;  and  we  are  obeying  man  only,  when  we 
yield,  even  to  those  that  have  lawful  authority  over 
us,  obedience  in  those  things  which  they  have  no 
right  to  teach  and  command. 

But  finally,  I  may  be  permitted  to  avow  my  be- 
lief, that  God  in  his  Providence,  will  never  permit  any 


VII.]  CHURCH    IN    THE   UNITED   STATES.  309 

Papal  nation  to  extend  its  dominion  over  one  in  which 
a  purer  Branch  of  the  Church  exists.  If  we  look  at 
the  Papal  nations  now  existing,  whether  we  consider 
the  South  American  Republics  on  our  own  continent, 
or  the  kingdoms  of  the  old  world,  France,  Spain,  Aus- 
tria, Italy — we  shall  see  but  very  little  to  encourage 
the  belief  that  there  are  any  of  them  likely  to  subju- 
gate any  of  the  Protestant  nations.  Where  is  there 
one  that  could  for  a  moment  cope  with  Great  Britain 
or  the  United  States  ?  Alas  !  they  are  hardly  able  to 
sustain  themselves,  crumbling  in  fact  with  their  own 
weight,  and  rent  with  internal  feuds  and  commotions. 
In  these  things  we  can  hardly  fail  to  see  the  hand  of 
Providence.  "  Verily  there  is  a  Grod  that  judgeth  in 
the  Earth." 

*20.  If,  now,  we  can   fix   our  attention     TheProtes- 

tant  Episcopal 

upon  the  facts  and  principles  that  have  been  Cburcb, there- 
brought  before  our  minds   in  the  foregoing  c0hruVch   of 
itions  lonj?  enough  to  see  their  full  force  Chri8t  for  the 

,         .     ,  .,  People     of 

and  bearing,  I  think  we  cannot  fan  to  see,  the  united 
thai  it  i-  as  certain  that  the  Protestant  Epis-  Slilte3- 
(•••pal  Church  in  these  United  States,  is  the  Church  of 
Christ  for  the  people  of  this  Union,  throughout  its 
whole  extent,  and  in  all  its  parts,  as  if  no  ages  of  dark- 
ness and  corruption  had  intervened  between  OS  and 
the  Apostles,  and  no  Sects  had  arisen  olaiming  the 
Christian  name.  This  communion,  therefore,  is  the 
Church  of  Christ  in  and  for  the  people  of  this  nation — 
identical  for  all  the  purposes  thai  immediately  con- 
cern their  eternal  interests  with  thai  Church  which 
is  spoken  of  in  the  Scriptures.     It  is  a  branch  of  the 


310  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Original  Vine  duly  articulating  with  the  parent  stalk 
and  thereby  connected  with  the  root. 

The  only  difficulty  in  identifying  the  Church,  as 
I  said  at  the  outset,  results  from  the  lapse  of  ages,  and 
the  vicissitudes  of  fortune  through  which  it  has  to  be 
traced.  In  some  histories  it  may  be  concealed  by  the 
overshadowing  importance  conceded  to  the  secular 
concerns  of  the  age.  Passions,  prejudices,  and  sinis- 
ter designs,  have  also  had  their  influence  in  diverting 
attention  from  the  naked  and  controlling  facts  in  each 
important  epoch.  My  aim  has  been  to  bring  these 
facts  distinctlv  forward — shutting  out  from  our  view, 
for  the  time,  all  others,  that  these  might  be  the  more 
justly  estimated  in  their  bearing  upon  the  main  and 
all-involving  conclusion.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that 
the  Church  has  not  in  some  ages  been  very  corrupt, 
that  it  has  not  been,  at  times,  greatly  at  fault  in  its 
treatment  of  its  members.  But  my  main  points  are  to 
identify  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  these 
United  States,  as  an  outward  and  visible  institution, 
with  the  Church  of  which  we  read  so  much  in  the 
Scriptures,  and  to  show  that  it  has  not  lost  its  charac- 
ter or  importance  in  a  spiritual  point  of  view,  by  any- 
thing that  has  transpired  in  its  past  history. 

Relations  *  21.  The  Scotch  Church,  (not  the  Estab- 
of  theProtes- ]jsnment,  for  that  is  a  Presbyterian  affair,) 
pai  church  to  and  the  Irish  Church,  are  in  full  and  Iree 
others.  communion  with   the  Protestant   Episcopal 

Church    in  the  United  States. 

But  neither  of  these  Churches,  nor  any  that  are 
in  communion  with  them,  recognize  as  parts  of  the 
visible  Church  of  Christ,  any  of  the  Sects  enumerated 


VIL]  CHURCH   IN   THE    UNITED    STATES.  31 1 

in  a  preceding  Chapter,  or  any  others  that  have  arisen 
since  the  Reformation.  Neither  of  them  recognize  the 
validity  of  their  baptisms — though  individuals  in  their 
communion  have  so  done.  Neither  of  them  receive 
the  members  of  those  denominations  to  communion  by 
letter,  or  on  certificate  of  membership,  from  them. 
And  both  the  English  Church  and  our  own  have  laid 
down  a  condition  that  excludes  their  ministers  from 
being  received  as  ministers  by  us  until  they  shall  have 
been  ordained  anew,  by  our  Bishops. 

But  this  is  not  the  attitude  which  these  Churches 
have  taken  towards  the  other  parts  of  the  Visible 
Church.  Between  us  and  the  Oriental  Churches  there 
is  free  communion  and  full  recognition,  notwithstand- 
ing some  important  differences  in  doctrine,  discipline, 
and  worship  they  remaining  where  they  were  at  a  peri- 
od somewhat  later  than  that  which  we  have  taken  for 
our  standard.  We  also  receive  both  members  and 
ministers  of  the  Roman  Communion  to  the  same  stand- 
ing in  ours,  on  a  distinct  renunciation  of  those  points 
10  which  that  communion  differs  from  our  standards, 
and  a  profession  of  agreement  and  conformity  to  purs. 
Thus  we  admit  the  Churches  in  the  Roman  Obedience 
to  be  true,  though  corrupt,  Churches  of  Christ. 

The  Unman  practice  toward  us  has  been  variant. 
They  use  certain  rites  in  Baptism,  Confirmation,  and 
Ordination,  which  are  omitted  by  us,  and  to  which 
some  of  their  members  attach  a  great  importance. 
K<>r  tins  reason  they  have  sometimes  admitted  the  va- 
lidity of  oar  Baptisms  and  Ordinations,  and  at  others 
denied  it.  'Thus  though  they  admit  the  validity  <>f 
baptisms  by  unordained   persons  in  their  own  com- 


312  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

munion,  yet  they  usually  regard  as  unbaptized  those 
persons  whom  they  can  succeed  in  perverting  from 
ours.  The  validity  of  our  ordinations  was  admitted 
until  some  years  after  Elizabeth's  accession  to  the 
throne  of  England.  But  latterly  they  have  been  al- 
most uniformly  denied  by  them. 

In  1704,  John  Gtordon,  Bishop  of  (xalloway,  in 
Scotland,  apostatized  to  the  Romish  Communion. 
This  brought  the  question  of  the  validity  of  his  ordi- 
nation before  the  Romish  See.  Grordon  had  requested 
ordination  in  the  Romish  Communion,  thereby  deny- 
ing the  validity  of  that  which  he  had  before.  The 
examination  of  the  subject  at  that  time,  proves  that  it 
had  not  been  previously  regarded  as  a  settled  question. 
Clement  XL  decided  against  the  validity  of  Protestant 
ordinations  ;  and  since  then,  I  believe,  they  have 
been  generally  regarded  by  the  Romanists,  as  of  no 
force  or  validity  whatever. 

It  would  be  entirely  foreign  to  my  plan,  to  enter 
into  a  discussion  of  the  grounds  on  which  this  decision 
of  the  Roman  See  is  based,  in  this  place.  Many 
reasons  are  given  for  it  by  the  Romanists  :  as  is  usu- 
ally the  case  with  those  who  are  determined  to  do 
what  they  can  find  no  one  good  reason  for  doing.  If 
the  Protestant  ordinations  were  invalid  in  1704,  then 
they  must  have  been  so  from  the  moment  when  the 
rejection  of  the  Papal  Supremacy  took  place,  and 
ordinations  began  to  be  held  without  the  Papal  con- 
sent or  approbation.  But  the  validity  of  the  Anglican 
ordinations  was  distinctly  admitted  by  the  Papists 
themselves,  as  we  have  seen,  in  the  reign  of  Mary, 
and  again  in  that  of  Elizabeth,  her  successor  on  the 


VTLJ  CHURCH    IN   THE    UNITED    STATES.  313 

Throne  of  England.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  a  Bull 
of  excommunication  was  issued  against  Elizabeth, 
and  all  her  subjects,  who  were  in  the  communion  of 
the  English  Church,  by  Pius  V.,  in  1659.  But,  as 
has  been  said,  the  Pope  had  then  neither  in  fact,  nor 
by  right,  any  authority  in  England,  or  over  the  En- 
glish Church.  Nor  had  any  of  the  Bishops  who- were 
then  in  the  exercise  of  the  duties  of  the  office — and 
whom  he  included  in  the  pretended  excommunication 
— been  ordained  under  his  supremacy — by  his  per- 
mission and  approbation,  or  any  pretence  of  having 
derived  any  authority  from  him.  Of  course,  there- 
fore, they  were  under  no  obligations  to  him  :  and  his 
excommunication  could  have  no  effect  upon  them,  (as 
is  sometimes  contended,)  on  the  ground  that  they  had 
derived  their  authority  from  the  Pope  and  that  he, 
that  gave  them  their  authority,  could  take  it  from 
them  again. 

Of  course  the  Pope's  adherents  must  maintain  the 
validity  of  his  Bull  ;  and  in  consequence  deny  the 
validity  of  all  ministrations  within  the  English  Church 
and  its  branches,  after  this  pretended  excommunica- 
tion. They  are  consistent  therefore  in  denying  the 
validity  of  our  ordinations.  But  the  force  of  the  Bull 
depends  exclusively  upon  the  divine  right  of  the 
Papa]  Supremacy.  l(  that,  as  we  contend,  and  as  I 
think  I  have  abundantly  proved,  is  a  mere  anti-Chri-- 
tian  usurpation,  then  of  c.nrsc,  Pins'  Bull,  and  ex- 
OOniiimnicatiui)  arc  of  no  force,  and  the  whole  ground 
foi  rejecting  the  validity  of  the  English,  Scotch  and 
American  Ordinations  is  shown  to  he  untenable.  It 
is,  in  tact,  a  mere  expedient  of  malicious  bigotry. 
14 


314  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

By  many  of  the  Roman  Catholics,  however,  we 
are  regarded  merely  as  schismatics,  whose  ministerial 
acts  are  valid  in  themselves,  and  only  voidable  as  an 
act  of  discipline  by  the  higher  authority  to  whom  we 
are  answerable.  They  claim  to  be  that  authority — 
with  how  much  reason,  may  be  seen  from  what  has 
already  been  said.  But,  for  the  most  part,  an  insane 
fury  for  the  establishment  of  that  most  anti-Christian 
dogma,  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  system 
they  are  now  engrossed  in  propagating — the  Papal 
Supremacy — has  driven  them  to  disregard  and  out- 
rage all  considerations,  not  only  of  charity  and  truth, 
but  also  of  decency  and  decorum. 

It  may  be  thought  by  many  that  this  is  a  reason 
why  we  should  disclaim  all  alliance  with  them,  and 
class  ourselves  at  once  with  the  Protestant  Sects. 
But  this  cannot  be  done.  A  sister  may  become  a 
harlot,  and  her  disgrace  may  change  the  nature  and 
manifestations  of  our  obligations  to  her ;  but  she  is 
our  sister  still.  "We  cannot  deny  that  the  same 
mother  bore,  and  the  same  father  begat,  both  us  and 
her.  Others  may  be  more  worthy  of  our  love,  but 
neither  this  fact,  nor  any  other,  can  change  the  rela- 
tions which  not  ourselves,  but  the  allotment  of  Provi- 
dence, has  formed  between  us. 

statistics  of        *  22.  The  present  statistics  of  the  Pro- 
the  Protestant  t    tant  Episcopal   Church,  are  :— 28  organ- 

Episcopal  rr  <=> 

church.  ized  Dioceses,  28  [1850]  Bishops,  in  actual 
discharge  of  Episcopal  functions  in  this  country,  two 
Missionary  Bishops,  1566  clergymen,  about  100,000 
communicants,  and  a  population  of  about  2,000,000. 


YIL]  CHURCH   IN   THE   UNITED    STATES.  315 

In  1789,  when  the  Church  was  organized,  the  whole 
number  of  Clergy  was  only  about  180. 

Each  Diocese  has  a  Convention  consisting  of  its 
Bishop,  the  Clergy  actually  engaged  in  ministerial 
duty,  and  Delegates  chosen  by  the  people  of  the  par- 
ishes. The  chief  Synodical  Authority  consists  in  the 
General  Convention.  This  body  holds  its  sessions 
once  in  three  years,  and  is  composed  of  all  the  Bishops, 
and  four  Clerical  and  four  Lay  Delegates  from  each 
Diocese. 

$  23.  It  may  be  expected,  that  I  will  not  The  Doctrinal 

.  .  Char acter  of 

pass  by  without  notice,  a  matter  of  so  much  the  Protestant 
importance  in  this  connection,  as  the  doc- ^hpuJ.c8hcopal 
trinal  character  and  teaching  of  that  Body 
which  we  have  identified  as  the  Church  of  Christ  for 
this  country. 

It  is  obvious,  that  a  consideration  of  this  matter, 
does  not  come  within  my  plan,  and  is  not  necessary  to 
its  completion.  I  will,  however,  make  a  few  general 
statements  on  the  subject. 

$  24.  The  first  point  that  I  shall  mention  Therm**-* 

,,.  ,  ,,  .  Episcopal 

in  this  connection,  is  the  declaration  in  the  cimr-cn  r.-cog- 
Vlth    "Article   of  Religion,"    that    "  Holv  niM'MluScriP- 

D  7  J    tuns  as   the 

Scripture  containeth  all  things  necessary  to  u,,l-v  S(),irM 
salvation:  so  that  whatsoever  is  not  read  orDiria* 
therein  i:<»r  ma)  be  proved  thereby,  is  not  to  Tr,,lh- 
be  required  of  any  that  it  should  be  believed  as  an 
article  of  the  Faith,  <>r  be  thought  requisite  or  neces- 
sary to  salvation."  And  by  the  VTIIth  Article,  the 
Church  declares  thai  the  Apostles'  and  the  Nioene 
Creeds  are  to  be  retained — "  tor  they  may  be  proved 

by  most  certain  warrants  of  Holy  Scripture." 


316  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

I  have,  in  fact,  already,  in  the  foregoing  pages, 
repeatedly  stated,  that  the  Reformed  Branches  of  the 
Church  returned  to  the  Scriptures  as  the  only  standard 
of  Divine  Truth — the  only  authority  by  which  any 
thing  can  be  proved  to  be  obligatory  upon  man,  as  the 
commandment  of  (rod. 

The  church,        §  25.  While,  however,  the  Church  in  this 
h  o  w  e  v  e s  r,  counfry   acknowledges   no  other   source   of 

claims  the  J  ° 

Right  to  be  divine  knowledge  than  the  written  Word  of 
preteTof  the  G~°d5  sne  claims,  in  all  cases  of  doubtful  in- 
scnptures.  tefpretation  or  construction,  the  right  to  inter- 
pret and  construe  that  Word  for  herself.  And  in  doing 
this,  she  professes  to  be  guided  by  the  earliest  and 
most  prevalent  construction. 

In  a  preceding  Chapter,1  I  have  shown  that  the 
right  to  interpret  the  Scriptures  for  herself  and  for  her 
members  in  all  points  included  in  their  relations  to  her, 
is  indispensable  to  her  existence  ;  and  is  only  what  is 
claimed  and  exercised  by  every  sect  and  society  of  men. 
In  other  words,  the  Church  claims  to  be  above  and  su- 
perior to  any  one,  or  any  part,  of  her  members.  Else 
she  could  not  maintain  her  Faith  or  her  Discipline — or 
continue  her  distinct  existence. 

The  possession  and  exercise  of  this  authority,  I 
have  justified  from  the  Scriptures,  as  well  as  from  the 
necessity  of  the  case. 

The  inevitable  inference  is,  that  we  are  bound  to 
look  to  the  Church  as  in  some  sense  and  to  some  extent 
our  teacher  and  guide,  under  Grod,  in  things  pertain- 
ing to  Religion. 

1  Chapter  v. 


VIL]  CHURCH   IN    THE   UNITED    STATES.  317 

This  principle  modifies  our  duty  and  our  course  to 
a  considerable  extent.  The  teaching  of  the  Church 
becomes  thereby  an  important  item  for  our  considera- 
tion in  our  investigation  of  truth.  Hence,  in  practice, 
if  we  find  the  Church  teaching,  or  holding  any  thing 
contrary  to  our  view  of  the  Scripture  doctrines — we 
may  not  lightly  dismiss  the  Church  testimony.  It  is 
of  more  importance  to  us,  than  the  opinion  of  any  one 
man.  Its  doctrinal  standards  are  the  result  of  the 
wisdom  and  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  possessed  by 
a  large  number  of  men  who  have  probably  no  superiors 
living  in  these  respects.  They  have,  moreover,  stood 
the  test  of  many  hundred  years  of  experience  and  dis- 
cussion. And  besides  this,  the  authority  necessary  to 
the  maintainance  of  its  integrity  and  discipline,  con- 
fers upon  the  doctrines  of  the  Church,  an  importance 
that  is  not  to  be  lightly  esteemed. 

We  should  never,  therefore,  dissent  from  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Church,  except  when,  after  a  thorough 
and  careful  examination  of  the  Scriptures,  there  is  no 
doubt  left  of  the  irreconcilable  contrariety  between 
the  two. 

With  regard  to  the  Church  in  this  country,  then, 
we  may  be  satisfied  that  she  does  not  intend  to  teach, 
or  to  require  us  to  believe,  anything  that  is  not 
according  to  the  Scriptures,  and  oontained  in  them  or 
clearly  deduced  from  them.  This,  of  course,  we 
ought  to  believe,  and  in  all  points  which  are  not  fun- 
damental,  it  is  ;i  pari  <>\  Christianity,  to  be  willing  to 
yield  our  preferences  for  the  sake  of  unity,  peaoe,  and 
harmony. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE    ROMISH    CLAIM    TO    JURISDICTION    IN    THE    UNITED 

STATES. 

It  is  well  known  that  there  has  long  been  a  class  of 
persons  who  advocate  the  Supremacy  of  the  Bishop  of 
Home  over  all  Christians  and  all  Christendom.  Per- 
sons holding  these  views  have  effected  a  settlement  in 
the  United  States,  organized  a  church,  and  claim  for 
it  the  sole  and  exclusive  right  to  the  ecclesiastical  ju- 
risdiction of  this  country. 

If  this  claim  be  well  founded,  it  will  greatly  modify, 
if  not  entirely  reverse,  the  conclusion  arrived  at  in  the 
last  chapter,  with  regard  to  "  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  United  States."  If  two  messengers 
come  unto  us  with  contradictory  messages,  it  is  indeed 
barely  possible  that  both  came  from  Grod  originally, 
but  it  is  not  possible  that  they  can  have  been  both 
designed  to  teach  the  same  people.  We  cannot  serve 
or  obey  two  masters,  or  two  different  stewards  of  the 
same  Master,  whose  instructions  either  do,  or  by  possi- 
bility may,  require  different  things. 

The  Romish  claim  presents  for  our  consideration 
two  questions,  which,  though  not  entirely  distinct, 
cannot  however  be  treated,  in  the  present  connections, 
as  altogether  one  and  the  same.  The  one  relates  to  the 


Chap.  VIII]     ROMISH    CLAIM   TO   JURISDICTION.  319 

Papal  Supremacy  in  general,  and  the  other  relates  to 
the  facts  and  circumstances  connected  with  the  settle- 
ment and  organization  of  those  in  this  country  who 
advocate  that  Supremacy. 

If  the  right  to  universal  supremacy,  as  it  is  claimed 
for  the  Pope,  be  well  founded,  it  follows,  that  no  per- 
sons who  reject  that  supremacy  can  be  capable  of 
exercising  jurisdiction  any  where.  But  even  if  that 
claim  be  not  well  founded,  it  is  possible  (or  at  least,  I 
am  willing  now  to  admit,  for  the  sake  of  the  argu- 
ment, that  it  is  possible)  that  those  who  advocate  it 
may  establish  a  Branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ  ac- 
knowledges:  that  claim,  and  thus  bind  the  conscien- 
cesof  all  within  the  appropriate  sphere  of  its  jurisdiction 
to  all  of  its  own  teachings,  which  are  not  plainly  and 
undeniably  contrary  to  God's  Written  Word.  It  may 
claim,  in  Christ's  name,  the  support,  the  submission 
and  obedience  which  He  has  authorized  His  Church 
to  claim  any  where;  and,  consequently,  this  sup- 
port, submission  and  obedience  cannot  be  justly 
claimed  for  the  same  people,  by  any  other  Branch 
of  the  Church,  or  any  other  persons. 

k  1.  Into  the  general  and  abstract  claim        The 
of  the  Supremacy,  I  shall  not  now  inquire  J^ZT*1" 
any  further  than  I  have  already  done  in  the 
foregoing  chapters. 

We  have  seen  that  it  was  unknown  in  the  first 
centuries,  and  prohibited  by  the  express  law  of  the 
whole,  Church  in  Council  assembled — thai  it  was  not 
recognized,  ami  did  aoi  exist  in  England  lor  the  first 
live  centuries,  at  le;i>i  ;  that  n  was  always  regarded 
by  the  laws  of  England  ;i->  ;>  usurpation;  the  Church 


320  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

of  England  all  the  meanwhile  being  acknowledged  to 
be  a  true  and  catholic  branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 
There  is  nothing,  therefore,  in  the  general  claim  of 
the  Supremacy  which  can  give  its  advocates  prece- 
dency of  right  in  this  country.  Consequently  our  at- 
tention must  be  directed  to  the  circumstances  under 
which  they  settled  here,  and  claim  to  have  established 
their  branch  of  the  Church  within  these  United 
States.  And  these  facts  and  circumstances  we  must 
investigate  in  reference  to  the  principles  of  Church 
identity,  already  laid  down  and  applied  to  other  Sects. 
The  time  $  2.  I  give  the  account  of  the  first  Ro- 
of the  settle-  misn   settlement  in   what  was  the   United 

meat. 

States,  when  they  first  became  a  separate  na- 
tion, in  the  language  of  a  Roman  Catholic  writer,  as 
follows : 

"  Lord  Baltimore  having  obtained,  from  Charles  I., 
the  Charter  of  Maryland,  hastened  to  carry  into  effect 
the  plan  of  colonizing  the  new  province,  of  which  he 
appointed  his  brother,  Leonard  Calvert,  to  be  Gover- 
nor. This  first  body  of  emigrants,  consisting  of  about 
two  hundred  gentlemen,  of  considerable  rank  and  for- 
tune, chiefly  of  the  Roman  Catholic  persuasion,  with  a 
number  of  inferior  adherents,  sailed  from  England,  un- 
der the  command  of  Calvert,  in  November,  1632,  and 
after  a  prosperous  voyage,  landed  in  Maryland,  near 
the  mouth  of  the  river  Potomac,  in  the  be^innino-  of 
the  following  year.  The  Governor,  as  soon  as  he 
landed,  erected  a  Cross  on  the  shore,  and  took  posses- 
sion of  the  country  for  our  sovereign  lord,  the  King  of 

England On  the  23d   of  March,  1634,  the 

festival  of  the  Annunciation  of  the  ever-blessed  Virgin, 


VIIL]  ROMISH   CLAIM   TO   JURISDICTION.  321 

and,  on  St.  Clement's  Island,  in  the  Potomac,  the  di- 
vine sacrifice  of  the  JVlass,  was,  for  the  first  time,  offer- 
ed up  to  (rod  in  this  portion  of  America."  ' 

This,  then,  was  the  first  settlement  of  Roman 
Catholics  in  the  United  States  proper.  St.  Augustine, 
in  East  Florida,  had  been  settled  by  the  Spanish,  in 
the  Roman  Communion,  as  early  as  1564.  Florida, 
however,  was  at  that  time  a  Spanish  territory,  and 
did  not  become  a  part  of  the  United  States  until  several 
years  after  the  commencement  of  their  independent 
existence  as  a  nation.  The  Papists  do  not  claim,  that 
T  am  aware  of,  priority  of  canonical  jurisdiction  in  the 
United  States  on  account  of  this  early  settlement  in 
Florida.  We  need  not,  therefore,  give  it  any  further 
attention  in  this  place. 

The  author  just  quoted  above  continues  : 
"  Between  the  years  1634  and  1687,  Roman  mis- 
Bionaries  had  already  traversed  that  vast  region  lying 
between  the  heights  of  Montreal  and  Quebec  and  the 
mouth  of  the  Mississippi,  the  greater  portion  of  which 
ifl  dow  known  as  the  United  States.  Within  thirteen 
y.ars  the  wilderness  of  the  Hurons  was  visited  by  sixty 
missionaries,  chiefly  Jesuits  :  one  of  their  number, 
Claud  Allowez,  discovered  the  southern  shores  of  Lake 
Superior."  ,J 

These  missionary  operations,  however,  were  not 
earlier  than  the  settlement  of  Maryland  ;  Mini  they  pre- 
sent nothing  thai  we  need  t<>  lake  into  special  consid- 
eration in  this  oonneotion. 

1  Prof.  Wuim:'>  Aooowti  of  //«•  Rcmtm  Catholic  Cfturril  in  the 
ikI  st,ih.<,  in  Rvppfi  Collection,  pp.  IIS— 117. 

1  W  ai.i  ik.  ul.i  mpfa,  j>.  1 1'.'. 
1  I* 


322  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Hence  it  appears  that  this  first  settlement  of  the 
Roman  Catholics  was  many  years  subsequent  to  the 
settlement  of  the  English  Church  in  the  British  Pos- 
sessions of  North  America.  The  right  of  priority  of 
canonical  occupation,  is,  therefore,  unquestionably 
with  the  Branch  of  the  English  Church. 
Lord  Baiu-        $  3.  Let  us  now  turn  our  attention  to  the 

ZZ  "incapi-  Persons  who  founded  this  Romish  Colony 
bie  of  found-  within  the  British  possessions. 
oMhe  chmch  Since  the  Papists  in  this  country  refer  to 
anywhere.  England  for  their  origin,  it  may  be  well,  be- 
fore we  proceed  any  farther,  to  notice  briefly  the  origin 
of  that  Sect  in  England. 

By  the  Bull  of  Pius  V.,  February  23d,  1569,  Queen 
Elizabeth  was  declared  "  a  heretic  and  an  encourager 
of  heretics ;  those  that  adhere  to  her  lie  under  the 
censure  of  an  anathema,  and  are  cut  off  from  the 
Body  of  Christ."  "We  likewise,"  says  the  Bull, 
"  declare  the  said  Elizabeth  deprived  of  the  pretended 
right  to  the  kingdom,  and  of  all  dominion,  dignity, 
and  privilege,  whatever,  and  that  all  the  nobility  and 
subjects  of  the  said  realm,  who  have  sworn  to  her  in 
any  manner  whatever,  are  for  ever  absolved  from  any 
such  oath,  and  from  all  obligations  of  fidelity  and  alle- 
giance." "  We  likewise  command  all  the  nobility, 
subjects,  and  others  above  mentioned,  that  they  do  not 
presume  to  obey  her  orders,  commands  or  laws,  for  the 

future." 

In  consequence  of  this  Bull  a  few  persons  seceded 
from  the  English  Church  and  formed  a  Sect  by  them- 
selves in  subjection  to  the  Pope. 

The  Romish  Sect  in  England  was  at  first  governed 


VIII]  ROMISH   CLAIM   TO   JURISDICTION.  323 

by  Jesuits  and  Missionary  Priests,  under  the  superin- 
tendence of  Allen,  a  Roman  Cardinal,  who  lived  in 
Flanders,  and  founded  the  Colleges  at  Douay  and 
Rheims.  In  1593,  George  Black  wall  was  appointed 
Arch-Priest  of  the  English  Romanists,  and  this  form 
of  ecclesiastical  government  prevailed  among  them 
until  1623,  when  Dr.  Bishop  was  ordained  titular 
Bishop  of  Chalcedon,  and  sent  from  Rome  to  govern 
the  Papists  in  England.  Dr.  Smith,  the  next  Bishop 
of  Chalcedon,  was  banished  in  1629,  and  they  were 
without  a  Bishop  until  the  reign  of  James  II. 

Eleven  of  the  Bishops  who  refused  to  acknowledge 
Elizabeth's  supremacy,  as  we  have  before  seen,  re- 
mained and  died  in  England.  The  last  of  them,  Wat- 
son, of  Lincoln,  died  in  1584.  But  the  Romish 
seceders  were  never  placed  under  their  jurisdiction. 
Nor  did  they  claim  to  be  Bishops  over  them.  Not 
even  this  pretence  to  be  the  Church  of  England  was 
set  up  for  the  Papists,  by  their  most  zealous  defen* 
drrs. 

These  titular  Bishops,  of  whom  we  have  spoken  as 
placed  over  the  Papists  in  England,  were  called  Bish- 
ops in  parti  bus  j  and  Vicars  Apostolic,  "  This  is  an 
officer,"  says  Butler,  "  vested  with  Episcopal  authority, 
by  the  Pope,  over  any  Church  which  is  in  want  of  a 
Bishop,  but  which,  for  some  reason,  ca-ntwb  have  one 
of  Us  own."  But  if  the  Papists  were,  a  branch  of  the 
( 'lunch  of  Christ,  having  lawful  jurisdiction  in  Eng- 
land, their  was  no   reason    why    they  OOUld    not    have 

Bishops  of  their  own.  Bntler  was  himself  a  Papist — 
his  admission,  therefore,  is  specially  important,  and  is  a 
confession  thai  tin-  English  Papists  were  not  a  branoh 


324  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

of  the  Church  of  Christ,  competent  to  the  performance 
of  ecclesiastical  functions.  They  were,  therefore, 
mere  intruders  into  a  field  which  the  Lord  had  com- 
mitted to  other  laborers. 

This  is  a  most  important  fact.  They  were  Papists, 
I  admit,  and  in  communion  with  the  Churches  in  the 
Roman  Obedience.  But  such  was  not  the  Church  of 
England  at  that  time.  The  Papal  adherents  in  that 
country  could  be  only  a  sect  in  opposition  to  the 
Church;  and  whatever  sympathy,  countenance,  or 
support,  they  might  have  from  the  members  of  another 
branch  of  the  Church  in  a  different  country,  it  could 
not  benefit  their  situation  in  England.  I  will  not,  of 
course,  deny  that  they  might  have  gone  to  Rome,  or 
France,  or  Spain,  taken  up  their  domicil  there,  and 
have  been  received  into  communion  with  that  branch 
of  the  Church  whose  doctrine  and  discipline  they  seem 
to  have  preferred.  But  they  could  not  be  duly  received 
into  the  Romish  communion,  and  gain  a  right  to  juris- 
diction any  where,  without  first  going  into  a  country 
where  some  Church  of  the  Romish  Obedience  had 
rightful  jurisdiction,  and  taking  up  their  domicil  there, 
ceasing  to  be  Englishmen  altogether,  and  transferring 
their  allegiance  to  some  other  national  sovereignty. 

As  Englishmen,  the 'English  Church  was  the  only 
one  for  them  ;  and  when  they  had  rejected  its  juris- 
diction they  had  rejected  the  Church  of  Christ  alto- 
gether;  they  could  not  set  up  another  jurisdiction 
within  her  midst,  unless  they  could  prove  that  she  had 
become  apostate. 

The  principle  involved  in  such  a  step,  is  the  funda- 
mental one  of  Christianity  itself.     It  is  simply  this : 


VIIL]  ROMISH   CLAIM  TO   JURISDICTION.  325 

whether  we  will  obey  (rod,  by  submitting  to  them 
that  He  has  placed  over  us,  or  rejecting  them,  will 
place  an  object  of  our  own  choosing  in  their  place,  so 
that  while  pretending  to  obey  Grod,  we  can  follow  the 
devices  of  our  own  heart,  and  exult  in  the  triumph  of 
our  own  unrestrained  wilfulness. 

The  first  settlers  of  Maryland,  therefore,  having 
rejected  the  jurisdiction  and  forsaken  the  communion 
of  the  only  branch  of  the  Church  to  which,  as  Eng- 
lishmen, they  could  belong, — and  having  never  sought 
or  obtained  reconciliation  in  any  effectual  way,  with 
any  other  branch  of  the  Church,  they  were  incapable 
of  founding  a  branch  of  that  Church  any  where. 

t  4.  Whatever  right  Lord  Baltimore  had      No  Juri9- 

°  ,  diction    could 

to  found  a  colony  and  a  Church,  was  derived  be  gained  for 
from  King  Charles  ;  himself,  a  layman  and  ^JwJii  in 
member  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  the  Romish 
therefore  he  could  give  no  authority  to  ex-  in  tne  Brilish' 
tend  any  other  communion  than  that  to  Possessions, 
which  he  belonged. 

It  has  been  said,  and  that  too  by  a  writer  calling 
himself  a  Protestant,1  "that  a  Romanist  may  reply, 
and  that  truly,  that  America  was  discovered  by  a 
member  of  the  Romish  communion — that  the  right  to 
the  country  was  derived  from  a  Papal  Bull,"  ....  as 
b  ground  upon  which  to  base  tfie  right  to  jurisdiction 
in  this  country  by  the  Papists. 

I  do  not  design  t<»  enter  upon  any  discussion  of  the 

accuracy  of  this  statement  of  the  tWO  tacts  referred  to. 

Let  them  pass  for  the  present  as  true.     It  is  undenia- 
«  Cnraci  Bsm  wt  fcrOet  L849,  p  429. 


326  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

ble  that  the  British  Crown  did  possess,  and  was  univer- 
sally acknowledged  to  possess,  the  sovereignty  of  the 
portions  of  this  continent  in  which  both  the  Baltimore 
and  Virginia  settlements  were  made,  and  at  the  time 
when  they  were  made.  Lord  Baltimore  himself  came 
here  under  a  grant  obtained  from  the  English  Crown, 
and  not  under  one  obtained  from  the  Pope. 

Now  there  was  nothing  in  the  manner  in  which 
the  English  sovereign  acquired  the  possession  of  this 
country,  or  in  the  tenure  by  which  he  held  it,  that 
obliged  him  to  maintain,  or  even  to  tolerate,  the  Papal 
religion  and  worship  within  its  boundaries.  This  I 
believe  has  never  been  pretended. 
♦  It  is  too  manifest  to  be  made  the  matter  of  remark, 
that  King  Charles  could  not  give  authority  or  permis- 
sion to  extend  the  communion  of  any  Branch  of  the 
Church  except  that  to  which  he  himself  belonged. 

But  let  us  look  at  the  grant.  "  It  professed  to 
have  in  view  '  a  laudable  zeal  for  extending  the  Chris- 
tian Religion  and  the  territories  of  the  [British]  Em- 
pire, ' "  and  bestowed  upon  the  proprietor  "  the  pat- 
ronage and  advowsons  of  all  churches,  which,  (with 
the  increasing  religion  and  worship  of  Christ)  within 
the  said  region  [granted  to  Lord  Baltimore,]  hereafter 
shall  happen  to  be  built,  together  with  licence  and 
faculty  of  erecting  and  founding  churches,  chapels, 
and  places  of  worship,  and  of  causing  the  same  to  be 
dedicated  and  consecrated  according  to  the  ecclesias- 
tical laws  of  our  Kingdom  of  England"  ' 

When  we  consider  that  "  the  Church  of  England  " 

1  Hawks'  Narrative    of  Events  connected  with  the  rise  and  progress 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  Maryland,  pp.  21,  22. 


VIII.]  ROMISH   CLAIM   TO  JURISDICTION.  327 

was  a  part  of  "  the  ecclesiastical  laws  of  our  Kingdom 
of  England,"  it  must  seem  doubtful  whether  any 
churches  for  the  Romish  Worship  could  be  built  under 
this  grant. 

But  it  is  hardly  worth  while  to  notice  this  point  at 
length.  Any  claim  that  can  be  based  upon  it  is  too 
feeble  to  deserve  much  attention. 

Whatever  may  be  the  proper  authority  of  princes 
and  kings  in  ecclesiastical  affairs — or  whether  they 
properly  have  any  or  not — it  is  quite  certain  that  that 
authority  is  no  fundamental  principle  of  Church  ex- 
tension. The  King  cannot  so  far  set  the  laws  of  God 
and  the  Church  at  nought,  as  to  give  her  enemies  the 
right  to  oppress  her  and  trample  her  under  foot ;  or 
to  come  in  and  take  her  inheritance  from  her.  He 
cannot  erect  any  little  knot  of  discontented  subjects 
into  a  valid  Branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  with  all 
its  solemn  sanctions  and  mysterious  spiritual  agencies. 
All  such  churches  would  be  founded  on  himself,  and 
not  on  Christ. 

§  5.   Lord  Baltimore  granted  free  tolera-    The  English 

....  ~  ii-  T  Church  t-stab- 

tion  to  all  "professing  to  believe  in  Jesus Hslll.(1  in Mary. 
Christ."  On  this  basis  things  continued  hndinM* 
until  the  great  Rebellion,  1640.  Settlers 
of  various  views,  in  matters  of  religion,  had  been 
received  into  the  colony.  The  Independents  then 
gained  the  ascendancy,  and  repealed  the  laws  of  uni- 
versal toleration,  and  proscribed  entirely  "  Popery  and 
Prelacy."  Hut  with  the  Restoration,  L660,  I;»»rd 
Baltimore  regained  his  rights  as  owner  of  the  colony, 
and  lor  ;i  season  all  things  proceeded  on  the  former 
plan.     The  mass  of  the  population,  however,  had  be- 


328  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

come  Protestants.  Accordingly,  the  accession  of 
William  and  Mary  to  the  English  Throne,  1688,  was 
followed,  after  some  preparatory  troubles,  by  the  over- 
throw of  Lord  Baltimore's  authority,  and  the  substi- 
tution in  his  stead  of  a  royal  Governor. l 

In  1675,  the  Church  of  England  people  made  an 
effort  to  increase  the  efficiency  and  number  of  the 
ministrations  according  to  the  usage  and  doctrines  of 
the  English  Church.  In  a  short  time  the  Protestants 
became  by  far  the  most  numerous — thirty  to  one,  as 
it  is  said2 — and  in  1692,  we  find  them  in  the  ascen- 
dancy in  all  the  offices  of  State  and  places  of  trust. 
"It  is  not  credible,"  says  Dr.  Hawks,3  "that  any 
very  serious  opposition  was  made  to  the  change  by  a 
respectable  part  of  the  Protestant  population — for 
tradition  would,  at  least,  have  preserved  some  memo- 
ry of  the  strife." 

In  1692,  met  the  first  Legislative  Assembly  of 
Maryland,  and  the  second  act  was  "  for  the  service 
of  Almighty  Grod,  and  the  establishment  of  the  Pro- 
testant Religion  in  the  Province."  4 

This  act  provided,  that  the  Church  of  England 
should  have  and  enjoy  all  her  rights  and  liberties  and 
franchises,  wholly  inviolable,  as  they  then  were,  or 
thereafter  should  be  established  by  law  ;  that  the  sev- 
eral counties  should  be  laid  out  into  Parishes ;  that 
the  freeholders  of  each  Parish  should  meet  and  appoint 
six  vestrymen  ;  that  each  person  should  be  taxed,  and 
the  Yestries  in  the    Parishes  where    there   were   no 

1  Wilberforce's  Hist,  of  the  American  Church,  p.  88. 

2  Hawks'  Maryland,  p.  59,  on  the  authority  of  Chalmers. 

3  Maryland,  p.  60.  4  Hawks,  ubi  supra,  p.  71. 


VIIL]  ROMISH   CLAIM   TO  JURISDICTION.  329 

Churches  should  cause  them  to  be  built,  and  apply  the 
remainder  of  the  tax  to  the  support  of  the  clergy. 
Under  this  act  the  Province  was  divided  into  thirty- 
one*  Parishes,  and  it  is  said  that  there  Were  then  six- 
teen ministers  of  the  Church  of  England  in  Mary- 
land.1 

I  certainly  am  not  disposed  to  ascribe  much  to  the 
authority  of  the  civil  powers  in  ecclesiastical  matters. 
But  this  "Reformation"  in  Maryland  seems  to  have 
been  made  with  but  little  or  no  opposition  from  any 
source,  and  the  ecclesiastical  authorities,  such  as  they 
were,  if,  indeed,  there  were  any,  seem  to  have  entirely 
acquiesced  in  it,  if  they  did  not  in  fact  take  the  lead 
in  bringing  it  about. 

This  act  is  worthy  of  notice ;  for  Lord  Baltimore's 
authority  for  establishing  a  Romish  communion  in 
Maryland,  was  from  King  Charles,  and,  of  course, 
purely  secular.  If,  therefore,  Lord  Baltimore's  au- 
thority, ftcting  a9  he  did  against  the  Church  of  which 
be  niiL'ht  to  have  been  a  member,  and  which  had  juris- 
diction Where  he  acted,  was  sullicient  to  give  validity 
to  his  act,  then  much  more  the  same  authority,  acting 
in  109:2,  in  accordance  with  that  Church,  and  for  the 
purpose  of  establishing  the  very  jurisdiction  which  he 
oiiLrht  to  have  established,  and  which  it  had  never  con- 
sented  to  relinquish,  was  valid.  In  either  view  of 
Lord  Baltimore's  authority,  therefore,  the  jurisdiction 

of  the  Knirlish  Church  was  fully  and  rightfully  estab- 
lished in  Maryland,  from  L692  downward. 

t  6.  Immediately  after  this,  l>r.  Thomas  Brat  was 

1  <SY»    Haw  iIm.v.'.  pp.  7  I    7'.'. 


330  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

dr.  bray  appointed  Commissary  by  the  Bishop  of 
pedntendent!"  London,  in  his  stead,  "  to  redress  what  was 
amiss,  and  supply  what  was  wanting  in  the 
Church  "  in  Maryland,  as  far  as  a  Presbyter  could  do 
so,  and  the  Church  of  England  continued  to  take  di- 
rect charge  of  its  colony  in  Maryland.  In  1770,  at  a 
general  meeting  of  the  Clergy  of  Maryland,  a  petition 
was  drawn  up  and  addressed  to  the  king — to  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  and  to  Lord  Baltimore,  praying 
for  the  establishment  of  an  Episcopate  in  these  colo- 
nies, but  their  prayer  was  not  granted.1 

Further  $  7.  In  the  spring  of  1779,  after  the  Rev- 
cZchby !he  olution,  the  Legislature  of  Maryland  passsd 
state.  an  act  to  establish  select  vestries,  and  vested 

in  them,  as  trustees,  all  the  property  that  belonged  to 
their  respective  Parishes,  while  they  were  a  part  of 
the  Church  of  England.  And  during  the  Revolu- 
tionary war  the  Legislature  of  the  State  actually  took 
up  the  subject  of  organizing  the  Episcopal  Church  in 
that  State.  They  were  prevented  from  doing  so  by 
one  of  the  clergy,  the  Rev.  Samuel  Keene,  on  account 
of  objections  to  the  manner  in  which  the  thing  was 
proposed  to  be  done.2 

Ecclesiastical        $  8.  In  1 783,  a  number  of  clergy  convened 
movement^  ^e  nrst  commencement  of  Washington 

towards  an  ° 

organization.  College,  and  the  subject  of  an  organization, 
the  revision  of  the  Liturgy,  and  the  obtaining  the 
Episcopate,  was  discussed. 

In  August  of  the  same  year,  a  Convention  of  the 
Clergy  was  held  in  furtherance  of  the  same  objects, 

i  Hawks,  ubi  supra,  p.  256.  2  Ibid.  pp.  290,  291. 


VIII]  ROMISH   CLAIM  TO   JURISDICTION.  33 1 

and  finally  adjourned  until  the  spring  of  1784.  In 
1788,  the  Church  in  this  State  drew  up  and  published 
a  Code  of  Canons,  and  her  first  Bishop,  the  Rt.  Rev.  Dr. 
Claggett,  was  consecrated  September  13,  1792.  Sev- 
eral previous  efforts  had  been  made  to  obtain  the 
Episcopate  without  success. 

$  9.  This  brings  us  down  to  a  most  im-  TheBomish 
portant  epoch  in  the  ecclesiastical  history  of  ri  l^°to  ^^ 
Maryland.     Up  to  the  time  of  the  Revolu-  diction  up  to 

-,       t-j  ■      j  i^)1  1     r»    11      the  time  of  the 

tionary  war  the  rapists  had  no  Church  luJly  Revolution, 
organized,  as  they  understand  its  organiza- 
tion.    They  had  nothing  in  point  of  fact,  which  even 
themselves  could  regard  as  a  branch  of  the  Church  of 
Christ,  and  since  they  had,  as  a  matter  of  right,  no 
jurisdiction  here,  they  could  organize  none  afterwards. 

We  might,  therefore,  leave  the  subject  here,  but 
I  prefer  to  consider  their  subsequent  organization,  to 
some  extent,  in  relation  to  this  matter. 

§  10.  After  the  termination  of  the  Rev-  K     Maryland 

became  a  Dio- 

olutionary  war,  Maryland  became  a  regularly  cese  in  the 
organized  Diocese,  and  way  one  of  the  first  ^"0p^i 
to  move  in  the  matter  of  an  ecclesiastical  Ohuich,befl»e 
union  of  "the  Church-of-England  people."  organization 
This  union  was  effected,  as  we  have  seen,  in  was  Lirected- 
178  1,  and  the  organization  was  completed  before  1789, 
by  the  possession  of  the  requisite  number  of  Bishops, 
(fmir.)  an  established  Liturgy  or  Worship,  and  settled 
Constitutions  and  Canons  of  Discipline, 

In  1.789,  some  four  or  five  years  after  "theChureh- 
of-Gngland  people"  had  organized  themselves  into  a 
Diooesc  in  Maryland]  and  became  a  part  of  the   Pro- 

testanl   BpisoopaJ  Church  in  the    Tinted    Slates,  Tins 


832  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

• 

VI.,  Bishop  of  Rome,  erected  Baltimore — the  metro- 
polis of  Maryland— into  a  See  for  a  Bishop  in  the 
Roman  Obedience  ;  and  on  the  7th  of  December,  1790, 
Dr.  John  Carrol  came  to  Baltimore  as  Diocesan. 

The  Nature        §  11.  Carrol  was  a  native  of  Maryland, 
of  this  Trans-  where  {fog  English  communion  was  regularly 

faction*  c  o  j 

established  before  he  was  born.  He  was  or- 
dained Bishop  in  England,  not  by  English  Bishops, 
but  by  a  Bishop  who  had  no  right  to  perform  any 
ecclesiastical  or  ministerial  functions  whatever,  in 
England.  He  came  to  establish  the  Romish  com- 
munion where  it  could  exist  only  by  including  those 
who  ought  to  be  in  the  English  Church,  and  were 
like  himself,  either  seceders  or  recusants  from  that 
Church.  It  was,  therefore,  an  act  of  the  most  direct 
opposition  to  the  Church  of  Christ,  which  was,  at  that 
time,  lawfully  and  canonically  established  in  Mary- 
land. 

Now  such  an  interference  with  the  lawful  and 
scriptural  ministrations  of  the  Church,  is  opposition  to 
Christ  himself,  and  is  what  is  called  in  St.  John's 
Epistles,  Antichrist.  It  comes  in  His  name,  under  the 
pretence  of  His  religion,  but  in  opposition  to  those, 
who,  according  to  His  laws  and  institutions,  are 
engaged  in  the  same  divine  functions  which  the 
intruders  come  with  a  pretence  of  performing.  His 
kingdom  should  be  characterized  by  peace  and  charity. 
But  such  a  proceeding  brings,  inevitably,  contentions, 
animosities,  strifes  and  divisions. 

Carrol  was  himself,  then,  a  recusant,  ordained 
Bishop  in  contravention  of  the  fundamental  laws  of 
the  Church,  come  to  a  See  erected  by  one  whose  claim 


VIII.]  ROMISH   CLAIM   TO   JURISDICTION.  333 

to  authority  here  was  the  most  unfounded  assumption, 
and  within  the  limits  of  another  branch  of  the  Church, 
where  he  could  have  none  for  his  flock  except  those 
that  had  rejected  the  communion  to  which  they  must 
belong,  if  they  would  be  in  obedience  to  Christ. 

I  might  here  leave  my  argument  as  completed, 
since,  in  fact,  my  plan  requires  me  to  consider  only  the 
priority  of  canonical  occupation  as  the  means  of  identi- 
fying the  Branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ  for  this 
country.  I  will,  however,  add  another  reason  for 
regarding  the  claims  of  the  Romanists  to  jurisdiction 
in  the  United  States  as  invalid. 

$  12.  They  did  not  come  here  to  found    TheRoman- 

•J  is t a  came  to 

an  independent  branch  of  the  Church  on  the  bund  upon 
simple  basis  of  the  Apostolic  Faith.  They  fha^tnat^of 
came  to   extend  a  human  theory  of  Roman  Primitive 

mi  ■>  !  Christianity 

aggrandizement,    lheir  authority  was  based  and  the  Pi  uni- 
on the  Papal  Supremacy,  and  the  doctrines  tlveChurch- 
winch  they  came  to  teach,  were,  in  part,  additions  to 
the  original  Revelation. 

This  is  a  point  to  which  I  have  already  alluded 
several  times.  And  I  now  give,  as  I  have  promised, 
the  addition  to  the  Creed  made  by  Pius  IV.,  which 
every  minister  in  the  Roman  Communion  is  bound  to 
teaoh,  and  every  layman,  consequently,  bound  to 
receive,  as  the  Rule  of  his  Faith. 

After  reciting  the  Nicene  Creed,  the  Romish 
Creed  proceeds  with  twelve  articles,  as  follows: — 

1.  The  Apostolic  and   ecclesiastical  traditions,  and 

other  observances  and  constitutions  of  the  Church,  do 
I  firmly  admit  ami  embrace. 

2.  Also  the  sacred  Scripture,  accar</it/^r  to  the  sense 


334  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

which  our  holy  mother,  the  Church,  hath  holden  and 
doth  hold,  (whose  office  it  is  to  judge  of  the  true  sense 
and  interpretation  of  Holy  Scriptures,)  do  I  admit; 
neither  will  I  ever  receive  and  expound  it  but  accord- 
ing to  the  uniform  consent  of  the  Fathers. 

3.  I  do  also  profess  that  there  are  truly  and  pro- 
perly seven  Sacraments  of  the  new  law,  instituted  by 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  necessary  to  the  salvation 
of  mankind,  though  all  are  not  necessary  for  every 
man,  viz :  Baptism,  Confirmation,  the  Eucharist,  Pen- 
ance, Extreme  Unction,  Orders,  and  Marriage ;  and 
that  they  confer  grace ;  arid  that  among  these,  Bap- 
tism, Confirmation,  and  Orders  cannot  be  repeated 
without  sacrilege.  Also  the  received  and  approved 
rites  of  the  [Roman]  Catholic  Church,  used  in  the 
solemn  administration  of  all  the  foresaid  sacraments, 
I  receive  and  admit. 

4.  I  embrace  and  receive  each  and  every  thing 
that  was  defined  and  declared  in  the  Holy  Council  of 
Trent,  concerning  original  sin  and  justification. 

5.  I  likewise  confess  that  in  the  Mass  is  offered 
unto  Grod  a  true,  proper,  and  propitiatory  sacrifice  for 
the  living  and  the  dead,  and  that  the  most  Holy 
Eucharist  is  truly,  really,  and  substantively  the  Body 
and  Blood,  with  the  soul  and  divinity,  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ ;  and  that  there  is  made  a  change  of  the 
whole  substance  of  the  bread  into  His  Body,  and  of 
the  whole  substance  of  the  wine  into  His  Blood,  which 
conversion  the  [Roman]  Catholic  Church  calls  Transub- 
stantiation. 

6.  I  confess,  also,  that  under  one  kind  only,  all  and 


VIIL]  ROMISH   CLAIM   TO   JURISDICTION.  335 

whole,  Christ  (totum  atque  integrum  Christum)  and 
the  true  Sacrament  is  received. 

7.  I  do  constantly  hold  that  there  is  a  Purgatory, 
and  that  the  souls  detained  there  are  holpen  by  the 
suffrages  of  the  faithful. 

8.  And  likewise  that  the  saints  reigning  with 
Christ  are  to  be  worshipped  (venerandos)  and  prayed 
unto,  and  that  they  offer  their  prayers  unto  (rod  for 
us,  and  that  their  relics  are  to  be  worshipped,  (reli- 
quias  eorum  venerandas.) 

9.  Most  firmly  do  I  assert  that  the  images  of 
Christ  and  of  the  Mother  of  Grod,  always  a  Virgin,  and 
of  the  other  Saints,  also,  are  to  be  possessed  and  re- 
tained, and  that  due  honor  and  veneration  is  to  be 
given  to  them. 

10.  Likewise,  I  affirm  that  the  power  of  indul- 
gences was  left  by  Christ  in  the  Church,  and  that  their 
use  is  in  the  highest  degree  salutary  to  a  Christian 
people. 

11.  I  acknowledge  that  the  Holy  Catholic,  Apos- 
tolic, and  Roman  Church  is  the  mother  and  mistress 
of  all  Churches  :  and  I  vow  and  promise  true  obe- 
dienoe  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  who  is  the  successor 
of  St.  Peter,  (the  prince  of  the  Apostles,)  and  the  Vicar 
of  Jesus  ( Ihrist. 

1"2.  I  do  also  undoubtedly  receive  and  profess  all 
other  things  which  have  been  handed  down,  defined, 
or  declared,  by  the  sacred  oanonsand  general  councils, 
and  especially  by  the  most  holy  council  of  Trent;  and 
at  the  same  time,  and  equally,  I  also  condemn,  reject, 
and  anathematize,  all  things  oontrary  to  the,  same,  and 
whatever  heresies  have  been  condemned,  rejected,  and 


336  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

anathematized  by  the  Church.  And  I  shall  take  care 
that  this  true  Catholic  Faith,  (out  of  which  no  man 
can  be  saved,)  and  which  I  now  willingly  and  truly 
hold,  shall  be  held  and  confessed,  whole  and  inviolate, 
most  firmly,  even  to  the  last  breath  of  life,  God  being 
my  helper,  and  shall  be  held,  taught  and  preached,  as 
much  as  is  in  my  power,  to  those  that  are  under  me, 
or  over  whom  I  may  have  charge,  in  my  calling. 

This  I  promise,  vow  and  swear ;  so  help  me  Grod, 
and  these  Holy  Grospels." 

After  some  declarations  with  regard  to  publishing 
this  Creed,  the  Pope  adds  : 

"It  shall  not  be  lawful,  therefore,  for  any  man  to 
infringe  this  will  and  commandment,  or  by  audacious 
boldness  to  contravene  the  same ;  which  if  any  man 
presume  to  do,  let  him  know  that  he  shall  incur  the 
indignation  of  Almighty  Grod,  and  of  St.  Peter  and  St. 
Paul,  His  Apostles." 

Thi9  §13.  This  is  the   Doctrinal  basis   upon 

constitutes  a  wnjon  the   Romish   Sect  in  this  country   is 

different  Basis  ,  _    _• . 

or  foundation  built.  I  shall  not  enter  into  a  prolonged  dis- 
from  that  on  cussion  0f  jts  contents.   That  is  not  necessary. 

which    the  ^ 

Aposties  built.  It  professes  to  teach  something  else,  as  equal- 
ly binding  upon  the  conscience,  and  equally  necessary 
to  salvation,  as  what  is  contained  in  the  Scriptures. 
The  chief  motive,  which  lies  at  its  foundation,  is  the 
building  up  of  the  colossal  power  of  the  Papal  Supre- 
macy— a  power  as  fully  anti- Christian  as  any  that  the 
world  has  ever  seen. 

This  Creed  is  their  Rule  of  Faith,  which  the  cler- 
gy promise  to  hold  and  to  teach  to  all  over  whom  they 


VIIL]  ROMISH    CLAIM   TO   JURISDICTION.  337 

may  have  charge.  All  their  teaching,  therefore,  must 
be  in  accordance  with  this  Creed. 

It  is  readily  admitted  that  any  branch  of  the 
Church  has  a  right  to  set  forth  definitions  of  the  faith, 
articles  of  agreement,  &c.  Of  such  are  the  XXXIX 
Articles  of  the  English  Church,  and  its  Catechism. 
And  in  such  cases,  the  question  is  as  to  the  conformity 
of  the  standards  with  the  Scriptures,  as  interpreted  by 
the  Primitive  Church.  But  the  Creed  of  Pius  IY.  is 
not  of  this  character.  It  professes  to  contain  the 
essentials  of  the  Faith  of  the  Communion  by  which 
it  is  received.  And  it  makes  all  of  its  articles — the 
Papal  additions,  as  well  as  those  derived  from  Scrip- 
tures— equally  fundamental  and  equally  necessary  to 
salvation. 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  Missionaries  in  the 
Roman  Obedience  came  into  this  country,  not  with  a 
design  to  extend  the  Communion  of  the  Church  of 
Christ  as  He  established  it — to  inculcate  simply  the 
Faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints — but  to  build  upon 
a  widely  different  foundation.  Unlike  the  English, 
they  make  no  pretence  to  adhere  to  the  Scriptures,  and 
the  Creeds,  Doctrines,  and  usages  of  the  Church  uni- 
versal in  its  earliest  age,  when  it  was  a  united  and 
unoorrupted  body.  But  they  came  here  to  disseminate 
Popery,  to  Lnouloate  what  waa  peculiarly  Romish. 

Tried,  then,  by  all  the  principles  of  Church  ex- 
tension and  identity,  the  Romish  Sect  in  this  country 
is  found  wanting.  It  was  established  by  those  who 
were    not    then    in   the   oommunion  of  the   Church. 

They   came  to  a  country  where    the   Church  had  been 

preriousl)  established,  and  their  additions  to  the  Creed 
15 


338  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

and  Faith  once  delivered  to  the  Saints,  were  so  great, 
and  of  such  a  nature,  as  to  make  the  basis  upon  which 
they  built  diverse  from  that  upon  which  the  Church 
itself  was  at  first  established. 

$  14.  It  is  sometimes  said  by  way  of  ex- 
to  regard  the  cuse  for  disregarding  the  Romish  claims, 
churches  in  that  the  Roman  Church  is  apostate.     If  by 

theRoman  x  J 

obedience  this  it  is  meant  that  the  Church  has  fallen 

apostate.  .  .*  ,i  ,•  j«i 

into  grievous  errors,  the  assertion  is  readily 
admitted.  But  unless  it  has  totally  and  wholly  fallen 
from  the  Christian  estate  and  condition,  so  that  they 
have  neither  Baptism,  Eucharist,  nor  any  other  divine 
ordinance  that  is  valid  and  acceptable  to  Grod,  then 
that  which  is  designated  by  "  apostacy"  does  not  of 
itself  void  their  jurisdiction. 

I  shall  not  assume  that  the  Roman  Churches  are 
apostate  to  such  an  extent  as  is  implied  in  this  method 
of  disposing  of  their  claims. 

A  Church  may  be  corrupt  in  itself  without  being 
apostate.  Bat  when  it  makes  its  own  corruptions  the 
stimulus  to  its  missionary  zeal,  and  goes  forth  to  build 
on  them  as  a  foundation,  the  superstructure  which  it 
erects  cannot  be  regarded  as  on  the  same  basis  with 
itself,  nor  deserve  to  be  considered  a  part  of  the  Church 
of  Christ. 

A  proper  regard  to  the  plan  with  which  I  started 
prohibits  me  from  entering  into  a  comparison  of  the 
doctrinal  character  of  the  Papists  and  the  Protestant 
Episcopalians.  I  am,  therefore,  limited  to  a  consid- 
eration of  what  belongs  to  the  ecclesiastical  position 
of  the  two  bodies. 

My  leading  object  in  this  chapter  has  not  been  to 


VIIL]  ROMISH   CLAIM   TO  JURISDICTION.  339 

present  the  corruptions  and  abuses  of  the  Romish 
Church  as  a  means  of  preventing  people  from  enter- 
ing its  communion.  There  are  many  of  its  doctrines 
which  it  seems  impossible  to  reconcile  with  the  word 
of  God.  To  these  I  could  never  consent  or  assent  any 
where.  But,  besides  these,  there  are  many  things  in 
the  Romish  Communion  different  from  what  we  have 
in  ours,  to  which,  though  I  do  not  like  them,  I  should 
assent  and  conform  without  hesitation,  if  the  Romish 
iSect  in  this  country  were  the  Church  that  has  right- 
ful jurisdiction  here. 

But  I  take  no  pleasure  in  exposing  the  faults  and 
errors  of  others.  It  is  always  an  unpleasant  task,  and 
exposes  one  to  the  danger  of  evil  speaking  and  of  un- 
charitable imputation.  Hard  names  and  abusive  lan- 
guage are  no  part  of  my  mode  of  argumentation.  I 
have  rather  designed  to  show,  that  ivhatever  doctrines 
the  Romish  Sect  may  hold,  no  person  can  be  in  that 
communion  in  this  country ^  and  be  in  obedience  to 
God  at  the  same  time. 

In  the  course  of  this  argument,  I  have  chosen  not 
to  assume  thai  ihe  Churches  in  the  Roman  Obedience 
are  apostate.  I  have  merely  assumed  that  the  adhe- 
rents of  the  Papal  Supremacy  were  schismatics  in  this 
Country.  But  J  hardly  need  remind  my  reader  that 
sehism  (Incs  not) any  more  than  any  other  sin,  always, 
and  oeoeaaarily,  render  those  guilt)  of  it,  incapable  of 
valid  ministrations.  Sohism  may  be  of  two  kinds. 
When,  for  instance,  :i  minister  intrudes  himself  into 
tie-  oare  of  another,  and  performs  ministerial  functions 
without  his  consent,  he  ii  b  Bohismatic  in  one  sense 
of  the  word.     In  this  ease,  the  olaim  of  the  intruder 


340  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

may  be  disregarded  with  perfect  impunity.  But  again. 
When  one  Church  refuses  communion  with  another, 
except  on  compliance  with  terms  which  it  has  no  right 
or  authority  to  demand — the  party  refusing  is  guilty 
of  a  schism  in  the  Body  of  Christ.  But  this  does  not 
void  its  jurisdiction  within  its  own  proper  territory.  A 
man  comes  into  my  house  without  any  legal  right,  and 
claims  to  dispose  of  my  family  and  property.  I  have 
a  perfect  right  to  turn  him  out  of  doors.  But  if  he 
stays  at  home  and  sets  up  a  claim  to  my  house,  or 
whatever  is  in  it,  he  is  guilty  of  a  breach  of  the  peace 
as  much  as  in  the  other  case,  but  this  gives  me  no  right 
to  go  and  turn  him  out  of  his  own. 

Still,  however,  the  Romanists  in  this  country  can- 
not be  regarded  as  occupying  precisely  the  same 
relation  to  the  identity  of  the  Church  as  the  other 
Sects  that  are  to  be  found  here.  They  have  the  Min- 
istry of  Christ  in  what  the  Church  has  always  regarded 
as  a  valid,  though  not  a  regular  succession.  They 
are  owned  by  and  identified  with  a  part  of  the  Church. 
Hence  their  ministrations  must  be  regarded  as  per 
se  valid.  This,  however,  is  very  far  from  putting  them 
on  an  equality  with  the  Protestant  branch  of  the 
Church  in  this  country. 

The  inference  $  15.  The  facts  and  principles  of  this, 
from  the  f<»re-  an(j  ^1G  foregoing  chapters,  establish,  I  think, 

goin^  A  r  g  u-  l  ' 

meuts.  as  clearly  as  facts  and   principles  can   ever 

prove  anything,  the  right  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  to  jurisdiction  in  these  United  States,  and 
throughout  the  whole  of  their  domain  ;  and  prove  that 
that  Church  is  the  Branch  of  the  Original  Vine  which 
has  reached  these  distant  shores  in  this  distant  age — 


VIII]  ROMISH   CLAIM   TO  JURISDICTION.  341 

here  to  blossom  and  to  bear  fruit  to  her  Divine  Lord 
and  Master. 

A  particular  Branch  of  the  Church  may  become 
apostate.  This  is  admitted.  But,  as  we  have  seen, 
there  is  nothing  alleged  to  prove  that  our  Branch  of 
the  Church  is  apostate  which  has  not  been  embraced, 
and  was  not  held  by  the  whole  Church  throughout  all 
of  its  Branches  in  the  first  centuries  of  its  existence 
We  cannot,  therefore,  regard  the  objection  as  valid 
against  us  without  involving  them  all — the  whole 
Church  of  Christ — in  the  same  condemnation,  which 
would  be  a  manifest  contradiction  to  the  Scriptures. 
It  would  show  that  the  divine  purpose  had  failed,  the 
Omniscient  Foresight  had  erred  in  its  predictions,  and 
the  Arm  of  Omnipotent  Power  had  not  been  able  to 
defend  His  Church  against  the  gates  of  Hell. 

*  16.  We  have  also  seen  that   the  Pro-  The  Duty  of 

all    Christians 

testant  Episcopal  Church  is  established  in  to  be  in  its 

,    .  .  f.  .,  .  ,1  1    •  .    1 '..mum uii hi. 

this  country  in  conformity  with,  and  in  exact 
fulfillment  of,  all  the  conditions  and  principles  of  the 
extension  of  the  visible  communion  of  Christ's  Church, 
winch  arc  contained  in  the  Scriptures,  as  interpreted 
by  ih<-  Church  itself.  Whatever,  therefore,  the  Scrip- 
tures say  of  the  Church,  is  for  us  in  the  United  Stairs 
to  he  understood  of  and  applied  to  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church  in  the  United  States,  in  so  far  as  it  can 
be  applied  in,  or  fulfilled  in,  any  particular  branch  of 
the  Church.  All,  therefore,  of  the  obligations  to  be- 
long  to  the  church,  al!  of  the  items  and  considerations 
which  Lr«»  i"  make  up  the  importance  of  its  identity, 

meet  ami  have  iheir  end,  tor  us,  in  that    ecclesiastical 

organization.     In  thai  communion  we  may  preserve 


342  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

the  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace1 — we 
receive  whomsoever  Christ  sends2 — we  obey  them  that 
have  the  rule  over  us3 — we  are  with  those  to  whom  He 
promised  His  perpetual  presence  always,  even  unto 
the  end  of  the  world.4 

But  on  the  other  hand,  if  we  enter  the  Romish 
Communion,  we  are  rejecting  those  whom  the  Holy 
Ghost  has  made  overseers  or  Bishops  over  us  ;5  and  we 
incur  all  the  guilt  described  in  the  Scriptures  as  in- 
separable from  divisions,  heresy,  and  schism.  Doubt- 
less there  are  degrees  of  that  guilt  depending  upon  the 
circumstances  of  each  case,  the  means  and  opportuni- 
ties of  the  individual  for  knowing  better  what  is  his 
duty.  With  a  full  knowledge  of  the  case,  or  the  means 
for  such  a  knowledge  before  us,  and  within  our  reach, 
it  is  doubtless  direct  apostacy  and  secession  from 
Christ.  We  are  rejecting  those  whom  Christ  has  ap- 
pointed to  rule  over  us  in  His  name,  and  are  yielding 
our  support  and  obedience  to  those  that  have  set  them- 
selves up  in  opposition  to  Him.  They  are,  therefore, 
Antichrist,  in  the  proper  and  legitimate  sense  of  the 
word.  They  are  carrying  on  an  opposition  to  Him — 
to  what  He  has  ordained — to  those  whom  He  has 
sent. 

1  Eph.  iv.  3.  2  John  xii.  20.  3  Heb.  xiil  17. 

4  Matt,  xxviii.  20.      5  Acts  xx.  28. 


CHAPTER  IX. 


THE    IDENTITY    OF    SPIRIT. 


I  might  now  regard  my  plan  as  completed.  But  "  it 
is  the  development  of  a  true  life  in  an  organic  body 
(which  must,  therefore,  have  historical  existence)  that 
identifies  the  Church.  No  identification  of  the  Church 
can  be  satisfactory  or  conclusive,  that  does  not  take 
into  prominent  consideration  both  modes  of  examina- 
tion. The  historical  existence  of  the  body  without 
the  life,  no  more  identifies  the  Church,  than  identifying 
a  corpse  identifies  the  man."1 

Every  organized  society  may  be  regarded  as  hav- 
ing a  certain  spirit  of  its  own ;  not  merely  what  the 
French  call  an  "  esprit  du  corp"  but  a  state  of  mind 
and  feelings  produced  by  their  association  and  the  pur- 
suit of  the  common  object  which  they  have  in  view. 
We  see  this  among  the  Masons — among  the  Presby- 
terians — among  the  members  of  a  Temperance  Society, 
and  indeed,  among  every  society  or  association  of  men. 
There  is  a  feeling  of  interest  in  the  a i lairs  and  history 
of  the  society,  and  in  each  of  its  members — a  zeal  and 
promptness  in  denying  unfounded  calumnies,  and  in 
apologising    for   undeniable    faults  and    mistakes;  a 

1  Chur.h  Bmitm,  <»ct.  LM9,  i>.  428. 


344  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

sympathy  of  feeling  and  a  general  similarity  in  cha- 
racter and  in  the  state  of  mind  and  heart  among  all  the 
members. 

This  holds  true  with  much  greater  force  in  the 
Church,  for  that  is  a  society  designed  for  special  spi- 
ritual purposes,  and  a  supernatural  agency  has  been 
promised  to  all  its  members — to  make  them  to  be  all 
"  of  one  heart  and  one  mind  " — to  renew  and  trans- 
form them  into  a  likeness  with  our  Blessed  Lord. 
The  identity  of  spirit,  therefore,  must  be  an  object  that 
can  be  easily  distinguished  and  traced  by  its  outward 
forms  and  manifestations. 

This  state  of        $  1«  St.  Paul  says  :  "  There  is  one  Body, 
Heart  and  an(j  one  gpir|t,  even  as  ye  are  called  in  one 

Mindpro-  *  m 

duced,  in  the  hope  of  your  calling ;  one  Lord,  one  Faith, 
STGhStheone  Baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of 
all."1 
It  is  quite  probable  that  when  St.  Paul  says  "  there 
is  one  Spirit,"  he  refers  by  these  words  to  the  third 
Person  of  the  Blessed  Trinity,  the  Holy  Ghost.  There 
is  one  Body — the  Church  ;  and  one  Spirit — the  Holy 
Grhost.  He  is  in  the  Church,  and  the  Church  would 
be  apostate  without  Him.  And  the  difference  in  their 
spiritual  condition — between  Christians  and  those  who 
are  not — is  the  fruit  and  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
in  and  upon  their  hearts. 

§  2.    The    existence   of   genuine    piety, 

This  implies  '  •    •        r    i 

a  renewal  of  which  may  be  considered  as  the  spirit  of  the 
our  Nature.  Churoh— being  the  effect  and  influence  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  does  most  unquestionably  imply  the 

1  Eph.  iv.  5,  6. 


IX.]  THE  IDENTITY  OF  SPIRIT.  345 

renewal  of  the  heart ;  and  without  such  a  change  in 
man  it  cannot  exist. 

$  3.  We  may  refer  to  a  variety  of  mani-       Th«;re  are 

J  "  many  Testa. 

testations,  or  tests  of  the  identity  of  spirit — 
and  to  their  existence  in  various  ages  and  branches  of 
the  Church  as  proofs  of  identity  in  them  all.  Obser- 
vance of  the  moral  precepts — the  duties  of  good 
citizenship,  and  of  good  neighborhood — meekness,  hu- 
mility, quietness,  temperance,  sobriety  and  truth — 
may  all  be  regarded  as  fruits  of  the  Spirit;  and  hence 
these  things,  or  at  least  a  tendency  to  them,  and  an 
approval  of  them,  must  be  found  in  all  the  Branches  of 
the  Church. 

I  shall  at  present,  however,  refer  to  only  a  few 
tests,  of  the  identity  of  spirit,  as  being  not  only  satis- 
faotory,  but  the  most  convenient  of  application. 

§  -1.    If  we  look  at  the  present  condition       °ur treat" 

m  e  n  t  of  the 

of  the  various  branches  which  we  have  iden-  Faults  and 
tilie.l  as    being   parts  of   the    one    Catholic  ^jf0?* 

O      I  the  Church. 

Church,  or  at  its  past  history,  we  shall 
doubtless  find  much  to  excite  emotions  of  one  kind  or 
another,  according  to  the  spirit  by  which  we  ourselves 
are  actuated.  We  shall  see  much  zeal  and  suffering 
lor  the,  cause  of  Christ.  We  shall  see  also  muoh 
ignorance — much  corruption — much  superstition — 
much  depravity — much,  in  short,  to  love  and  admire 

— muoh  to  Censure  and  condemn,  as  well  as    much  to 

pity  and  bewail. 

All  this  we  may  admit  as  matter  of  fact  and  of  his- 

toi        And  it  will  excite  various  emotions  iii  different 

olasses  of  individuals,  according  to  the  spirit  by  which 

the)  are  actuated.    Now,  the  Sects  will  undoubtedly  bo 

L5* 


346  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

inclined  to  represent  the  corruptions  in  the  Church  to 
have  began  at  as  early  a  period  as  possible — perhaps 
to  exaggerate  them,  and  at  least,  to  speak  of  them  in 
as  strong  language  of  condemnation  as  the  subject  will 
bear.  This  is  a  part  of  their  justification  for  their  ex- 
istence as  Sects. 

On  the  other  hand,  a  Churchman — one  who  recog- 
nizes in  himself  a  member  of  that  same  Church  in 
which  these  corruptions  are  represented  to  have  pre- 
vailed, will  be  disposed  to  extenuate,  and  as  far  as 
truth  and  candor  will  allow,  to  draw  the  veil  of  charity 
— "  for  charity  covereth  a  multitude  of  sins  " — over 
their  errors  and  faults.  He  will  feel  towards  the  repu- 
tation of  the  Church  as  a  Puritan  in  this  country 
does  towards  the  history  of  the  English  Non-conform- 
ists— as  the  Presbyterians  do  towards  that  of  Calvin, 
and  the  Presbyterians  on  the  Continent  of  Europe — as 
the  Masons  of  the  present  day  do  towards  the  past 
history  of  their  institution. 

This  Test  §  5.  Now,  as  a  general  thing,  the  Sects 
applied.  which  we  have  enumerated  in  a  foregoing 
chapter,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  do  consider  the  Church 
to  have  become  corrupt  at  a  very  early  age — much 
earlier  than  the  members  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  this  country,  or  the  members  of  the  Church 
in  any  other  country,  will  admit  that  it  became  cor- 
rupted in  any  important  point.  The  members  of  these 
Sects  also  represent  the  extent  and  influence  of  those 
corruptions  as  much  greater  than  any  branch  of  the 
Church  has  admitted. 

Undoubtedly  there  is  an  extreme  on  both  sides  to 
which  we  mav  run.     I  do  not  now  undertake  to  say 


IX]  THE    IDENTITY   OF    SPIRIT.  347 

that  the  Church-people  in  this  country  have  not  gone 
to  one  extreme  ;  nor  that  the  Sects  on  the  other  hand 
have  gone  to  the  other.  I  only  refer  to  the  fact  that 
they  tend  in  different  directions  and  towards  opposite 
extremes. 

No  special  proof  of  this  assertion,  I  presume,  will 
be  demanded  or  expected.  The  matter  is  obvious  to 
all  men.  The  Sects  universally  reproach  the  Episco- 
palians with  making  tradition — which  is  but  the  testi- 
mony, opinions,  and  usages  of  the  Church — a  joint 
Rule  of  Faith  with  the  Scriptures — of  looking  with  a 
blind  reverence  to  the  past,  instead  of  sympathizing 
with  the  improvements  of  the  age.  It  is  thought  that 
we  do  not  condemn  and  reject  the  errors  of  Rome  and 
the  Oriental  Churches  with  sufficient  decision,  and  we 
are  accused  of  inclining  towards  them. 

If  we  look  behind  these  outward  acts  to  the  mo- 
tives from  which  alone  they  can  proceed,  we  shall  find, 
in  one  case,  a  partiality  for  the  Church,  and  in  the 
other,  ;i  disposition  to  disparage  it;  though  those  who 
are  actuated  by  the  last  named  motive,  may  be  un- 
conscious to  themselves  of  any  such  feeling.  But 
without  it,  most  certainly  they  would  not  be  disposed 
to  exaggerate  the  faults  of  the  Church. 

$  (i.  None  of  the  Sects,  1  believe*  have 

Regard    to 

any  Holy  Days  for   the  oommemoration  of  the  Earij  u- 

the    Apostles    and    Martyrs,  by  whose  blood  >  ^F^ 

in)  less  than  their  lives,  the  infant  Church 
was  nurtured  and  made  strong.     They  pay  but  little 
regard  to  the  decisions  and  Canons  of  the  early  Coun- 
cils— to  the  early   Liturgies  and  Creeds.       Many  of 
them   know  nothing  at    all   of  these   things,  and  do 


348  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

not  appear  to  care  anything  about  them.  The  suffer- 
ings of  the  early  Martyrs  and  Confessors  interest  them 
less,  and  apparantly  excite  less  sympathy  in  their 
minds,  than  the  labors,  privations,  and  persecutions 
of  the  founders  and  early  fathers  of  their  own  Sects. 

§  7.  I   refer  to    this   obvious  difference 

Diversity  be- 
tween Church  between    the   Protestant   Episcopal    Church 

tori!^ in  this  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Protestant  Sects 
Respect.  on  the  other — a  difference  which,  so  far 
from  being  denied  by  any  body,  is  a  matter  of  boast 
on  both  sides,  and  a  matter  with  which  each  in  turn 
reproaches  the  other,  as  proving  that  they  are  actu- 
ated by  a  different  spirit  in  this  particular.  And, 
without  going  into  the  question  of  right  and  wrong 
in  the  case,  I  say  that  the  difference  shows  where  the 
Church-spirit  or  the  spirit  of  the  Church  is.  The 
Protestant  Episcopalians  may  go  only  to  the  just  and 
the  justifiable  extent  of  brotherly  love  in  this  matter, 
or  they  may  have  gone  to  the  extreme,  and  be  justly 
censurable  for  the  abuse  of  that  sentiment.  But  which 
view  soever  be  taken  of  this  peculiarity  of  the  Church- 
men in  this  country,  in  either  case  it  shows  where  the 
sentiment  exists,  and  where  it  does  not. 

h  8.  I  have   said    that  there  will  be   a 

This  Senti- 
ment of  Parti-  sympathy   and    sentiment  of  brotherly   love 

chin-ch^cri^-  among  the  members  of  the  Church  as  a  con- 
turai.  sequence  of  their  common  experience,  com- 

mon hopes,  and  common  interests.  The  cultivation 
of  this  sentiment  is  also  represented  as  a  duty.  "Let 
brotherly  love  continue."1    And  our  Saviour  has  made 

»  Heb.  xiii.  1 :  Rom.  xii  10  :  1   Thess.  iv.  2  :  2  Pet.  i.  1. 


IX.]  THE    IDENTITY   OF   SPIRIT.  349 

it  a  test  whereby  we  may  know  who  are  His  disciples  : 
"  By  this  shall  all  men  know  that  ye  are  My  disciples, 
if  ye  have  love  one  to  another."1 

*  9.  This  sentiment,  however,  will  not       Brotherly 

love    includes 

extend  merely  to  the  members  of  oar  own  aii  the  Mem- 
parish,  nation,  or  age;  but  it  will  embrace  ^8ur°Jh  ^ 
the  whole  fellowship  of  the  Church — the  Christ, 
whole  family  of  Christ.  Those  whom  He  has  re- 
ceived throughout  the  past  ages  of  the  Church,  and 
in  the  different  nations  where  it  exists,  are  our  breth- 
ren. Or  if  not,  the  fault  is  in  our  position,  and  not 
in  theirs.  The  time  has  now  gone  by  when  they 
could  be  unchurched.  If,  therefore,  we  are  in  the 
Church,  they  are  our  brethren  in  Christ,  and  the  sen- 
timent of  brotherly  love,  if  it  be  genuine,  will  extend 
towards  them,  and  we  shall  cultivate  it  if  we  dis- 
charge the  whole  of  our  duty.  We  are  not  left  to 
select  for  ourselves  who  shall  be  our  brethren  in  our 
spiritual,  any  more  than  in  our  natural,  relations. 
And  we  must  have  sufficient  self-denial  to  receive 
and  acknowledge  whomsoever  Christ  has  received  into 
the  foUowshipof  His  Church,  however  different  our 
tastes  and  preferences  might  have  made  the  selection 
if  the  making  of  it  had  been  left  to  ourselves. 

I  refer  then  to  this  sentiment  which  is  manifested 
towards  what  is  known  and  acknowledged  to  have 
oeeo  the  Church  of  Christ  in  ages  past,  as  proof  of 
identity  of  spirit  between  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  United  States,  and  the  Church  of  the 
Fathers,  the  A.postles,  and  Martyrs. 

1  .lolm   xiii.   :!fi. 


350  THE  CHURCH  H)ENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Even  the  $  10.  It  will  be  understood  that  I  am 
senStimehnI  not  Panting  out  the  course  that  ought  to  be 
proves  its  Ex- taken  ;  or  suggesting  a  direction  in  which 
we  may  go,  without  going  to  a  vicious  ex- 
treme, or  amiss  from  the  right  way.  Doubtless  we 
should  not  deny  that  errors  and  corruptions  have  pre- 
vailed in  the  Church.  Nor  should  our  sympathy 
for  those  whom  we  must  acknowledge  to  be  brethren, 
lead  us  to  imitate  their  faults.  But  even  if  this  sen- 
timent leads,  or  has  led  to  this  abuse,  its  existence  is 
none  the  less  on  that  account  an  evidence  of  the  main 
point  of  our  present  subject — the  identity  of  spirit 
manifested  in  what  may  be  called  a  partiality  for  the 
Church — in  all  of  its  affairs  and  its  history — a  dispo- 
sition to  extenuate,  rather  than  to  condemn — to  throw 
the  veil  of  charity  over  faults,  rather  than  expose  them 
to  the  scoffs  and  sneers  of  the  infidel  and  the  profane 
— to  treat  them,  in  short,  as  we  do  the  faults  of  our 
brethren  in  the  flesh — faults  which  are  too  obvious  to 
be  denied,  and  yet  too  painful  to  be  spoken  of  when  it 
can  be  avoided. 

Now  there  is  no  doubt  which  of  these  two  opposite 
courses  the  Protestant  Episcopalians  in  this  country 
take.  There  is  no  more  doubt  which  of  the  two  the 
Protestant  Sects  take.  And  the  adherents  to  the 
Roman  See  are,  in  fact,  fast  taking  sides  with  the 
Sects  in  this  matter.  Their  avowal  of  the  doctrine  of 
Development,  including  a  right  on  their  part  to  de- 
cree new  articles  of  Faith,  and  to  depart  from  the 
doctrines  and  usages  of  the  Fathers — is  a  manifesta- 
tion  of  the  same  sentiment  as  that  by  which  the  Sects 
are  actuated,  though  in  a  different  form.     And  so  far 


IX. J  THE    IDENTITY   OF   SPIRIT.  351 

as  it  extends  it  shows  that  the  spirit  of  sectarianism 
and  not  the  spirit  of  the  Church,  is  prevailing  among 
the  Romanists. 

$11.  Unquestionably  there  are  positive  The  Eati. 
Institutions  and    outward    tests  in   Christi- mation  in 

.  which  the  Di- 

anity  ;  and  without  them  one  great  object  vine  inetitu- 
of  our  call  to  the  Christian  state  is  lost.     A  **"•*** 

another  Test. 

leading  design  in  the  introduction  of  Christi- 
anity to  the  world  was,  that  men,  by  the  observance  of 
these  Institutions  and  tests  on  earth,  should  habituate 
themselves  to  self-denial  and  self-control,  and  to  the 
continued  yielding  up  of  their  wills,  so  that  they  may 
do  the  will  of  Another,  and  acquire,  by  religious  dis- 
cipline and  experience  in  this  state  of  their  being, 
with  the  help  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  holy,  and,  to 
us,  second  nature  which  may  fit  them  for  the  society 
and  employments  of  the  souls  of  the  just  made  per- 
fect. 

Hence  the  training  which  carefully  observes  the 
outward  and  positive  Institutions,  is  a  part  of  religion 
U  essentia]  in  itself  considered,  as  the  inward  experi- 
ence of  renewal  and  peace. 

Ami  these  outward  Institutions  are  a  better  test  of 
our  conversion,  and  the  genuineness  of  our  piety  than 
the  inward  emotions  :  since  they  bring  us  at  once  and 
directly  into  connection  with  what  God  has  ordained 
for  us.  Hence  they  are  the  tesl  whether  we  will  obey 
1 1  mi  or  not. 

When  ;t  mail   ohanges    his   opinions  and    course  of 

life  wuli  sobriety  and  emotion,  he  may  be  said  "to  be 

converted.       lint     QOl    every    c<»nvei>ion    18   turning   to 

the  Lord.     Bach  sect  and  each  impostor oal Is  the  em- 


352  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

bracing  of  his  or  their  peculiar  views  "  conversion." 
Hence  we  hear  of  converts  to  Millerism,  to  Mormon- 
ism,  to  Popery,  and  sometimes  even  to  Mahomet anism. 
All  such  changes  are  attended  with  much  emotion, 
and  are  regarded  by  those  who  are  the  subjects  of 
them,  no  less  than  by  those  to  whom  they  are  con- 
verted, as  a  light  and  joy  from  above — the  fruit  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  And  if  we  appeal  to  the  consciousness 
of  the  individuals  themselves  as  the  test,  we  shall  be 
in  danger  of  finding  what  may  be  regarded  as  the  best 
evidence  only  there,  where  the  fanaticism  is  the  most 
unmingled  and  unrelenting  in  its  hold  upon  its  victim. 

There  must,  therefore,  be  some  objective  test ;  and 
surely  there  can  be  nothing  better  than  the  regard 
paid  to  the  Word  and  Institutions  of  Grod.  One  may 
be  converted  to  the  peculiarities  of  a  Sect,  and  show 
no  more  regard  for  what  is  really  divine  than  he  did 
before — and  the  inward  confidence  which  his  experi- 
ence has  inspired  may  be  a  perfect  shield  against  the 
truth  itself. 

It  is  a  little  remarkable,  perhaps,  that  the  Scrip- 
tures do  not  contain  the  word  " piety"  at  all;  but 
righteousness  is  described  as  "  walking  in  all  the 
statutes  and  ordinances  of  the  Lord  blameless." 

The  Church  itself  is  indeed  a  divine  institution. 
But  it  includes  within  itself,  and  for  the  observance 
and  regard  of  its  members,  several  others — the  Scrip- 
tures, the  Ministry,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  Baptism,  the 
Lord's  Supper,  &c. 

I  do  not  mean  to  discuss  at  length,  in  this  place, 

1  Luke  L  6. 


IX]  THE   IDENTITY    OF   SPIRIT.  353 

the  nature,  design,  or  importance  of  these  sacred  in- 
stitutions. I  refer  only  to  the  sentiment  manifested 
toward  them  by  different  classes  of  individuals  for  the 
purpose  of  identifying  the  spirit. 

To  make  my  investigation  complete  I  ought  to 
refer  to  the  past,  and  show  that  the  Church  has 
always,  in  all  ages,  been  characterized  by  a  high  re- 
gard to  these  institutions.  Bat  we  have  neither  time 
nor  space  to  go  into  a  discussion  of  that  kind.  I  will, 
therefore,  merely  say — that  those  who  have  been 
found  to  be  Sects  by  the  outward  indications  of  history, 
now,  and  in  all  ages  past,  accuse  and  have  accused 
Churchmen  of  superstition  and  formality  on  account  of 
the  high  estimation  in  which  they  hold  these  Institu- 
tions. These  charges  against  the  Protestant  Episco- 
palians in  tins  country  have  doubtless  been  heard  by 
all  persons. 

$   12.   It    is  the  well-known  tendency  of     These  in- 

•  •  •  i  i  i-T_      8titutioii9  inti- 

love    to   magnify — it  that  be   possible — the  ,nilteiy    con- 
import  a n<-c,  of  its  object,  and,  at  any  rate,  to  nocted     wl,h 

1  J  J  our  Lord  Him- 

exaggerate   rather  than  disparage  whatever  ^ir. 
LB  connected  with,  or  has  proceeded  from  it. 

Now.  there  is  no  doubt  that  our  Lord  did  institute 
a  ministry — that  He  gave  His  disciples,  at  their  re- 
quest,  a  Prayer — a  Form  of  Prayer — that  He  insti- 
tuted the  Saoramenl  of  Baptism  to  be  received  by  all 
who  should  he  converted  to  Him — and  In  which  He 
also  Himself,  was  declared  from  Heaven  to  he  the  Son 
of  Qud — and  the  Sacrament  of  His  Last  Supper — by 
which    Hi-    People    are  to   show    forth    His  death  until 

Hia  coming  again.     Ifosl   intimately,  and  most  un- 
questionably,  therefore,   are   these  things  connected 


354  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

with  Him.  And  they  were  instituted  by  that  Spirit 
which  produces  the  unity  and  identity  of  spirit  in  the 
Church. 

How,  then,  will  genuine  piety  dispose  us  to  regard 
these  Institutions  ?  I  speak  not  now  of  erroneous 
views  concerning  them :  nor  of  the  superstitions  of 
the  past  and  present  ages  which  have  exalted  the  in- 
ventions of  man,  and  the  cunning  devices  of  the 
designing  into  an  estimation  of  equal  importance  with 
those  Institutions  which  Grod  has  most  certainly  or- 
dained. But  is  it  not  the  tendency  of  genuine  piety, 
of  pure  and  unfeigned  love,  to  place  too  high  an  esti- 
mation upon  what  Grod  has  ordained: — if  that  be 
possible — rather  than  to  disparage  it?  There  may  be 
extremes  on  both  sides,  and  the  best  of  sentiments 
may  be  abused.  Yet  the  abuse  shows  the  existence 
of  the  sentiment.  The  abuse  of  the  sentiment  now  in 
question,  is  manifested  in  an  over  estimate  of  these 
Institutions.  Its  absence,  on  the  contrary,  is  mani- 
fested by  holding  them  in  a  light  estimation  and  in  a 
disposition  to  omit  or  neglect  their  observance  alto- 
gether, as  unimportant. 

Now  the  Church  has  always  held  them  to  be 
means  of  grace,  and  ordinances  whose  observance  is 
conducive  to  salvation.  The  Sects,  on  the  contrary, 
generally  regard  this  view  of  them  as  a  dangerous 
superstition. 

§  13.  If  we  love  Him  who  founded  the 

No   danger 

of  Reverencing  Church  and  gave  to  it  its  Institutions,  we 
Btitutions  toocann°t  fail  to  venerate  and  esteem  them 
much.  very  highly  in  love  for  His  sake.     If  there 

were  any  doubt  or  reason  to  distrust  their  connection 


IX]  THE  IDENTITY  OF  SPIRIT.  355 

with  Him,  it  might  indeed,  be  superstition  to  bestow 
upon  them  the  regard  with  which  piety  embraces 
them  when  they  are  ascertained  to  be  genuine.  The 
feelings  of  piety  and  love  and  gratitude  and  self-devo- 
tion, awakened  in  the  renewed  heart  by  the  considera- 
tion of  what  the  Saviour  has  done  for  us,  flow  out 
toward  these  Institutions,  in  which  He  comes  nigh 
unto  us  and  is  present  with  our  souls. 

It  rests  upon  the  undoubted  word  of  God  that 
many  will  fail  to  enter  into  His  Heavenly  rest  on 
account  of  their  unbelief.  But  there  is  neither  cau- 
tion nor  warning  in  all  the  Holy  Scriptures  against 
esteeming  too  highly,  or  loving  with  too  ardent  a  zeal, 
anything  which  our  Lord  has  instituted  or  commanded. 
There  is  no  intimation  that  such  a  thing  is  possible. 
The  Lord  loved  the  Church  and  gave  Himself  for  it : 
our  highest  glory  is  to  be  like  Him. 

§  14.  Again.  The  Church  has  always  TheRegard 
shown  a  preference  for  worship  with  a  stated  for  Liturgical 
Liturgy,  and  such  was  the  mode  of  worship  characteristic 
in  which  our  Saviour  Himself  en^aored  while  of  the  Piety  ° 

°    °  the  Church. 

He  was  here  in  the  flesh.  It  is  equally  cer- 
tain and  equally  admitted  that  the  Church  has  always 
been  disposed  to  regard  Baptism  as  a  saving  ordinance 
— that  it  has  always  manifested  a  disposition  to  a  fre- 
quent administration  and  reception  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  and  that  Daily  Prayer  in  the  Sanctuary, 
Horning  and  Evening,  has  been  felt  to  be  both  a 
privilege  and  a  duty.  Through  all  the  vicissitudes  of 
the  Church's  history  and  throughout  all  its  branches 
— amidst  all  the  diversities  in  other  matters — we  find 
an  identity  of  spirit   manifested  in  these   respects. 


356  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap- 

Whether  we  look  at  the  centuries  when  the  Disciples 
of  the  Lord  had  to  creep  stealthily  before  the  light  of 
day  should  facilitate  their  detection,  to  dens  and 
caverns  in  the  earth  there  to  chant  their  praise  to 
Christ,  their  Grod,  and  renew  their  vows,  and  refresh 
their  souls  in  the  Commemoration  of  the  Last  Supper, 
or  whether  we  consider  the  oppressed  remnants  of  the 
Grreek  Church,  scarcely  permitted  by  their  Mahometan 
oppressors  to  meet  in  the  most  obscure  and  unpretend- 
ing hovel,  made  a  Sanctuary  indeed  by  the  presence 
of  their  Grod  with  them,  or  whether  we  look  to  the 
magnificent  Cathedral  and  splendid  pageantry  of  the 
more  prosperous  branches  of  the  Church  in  the  West, 
or,  in  fine,  to  the  chaste  simplicity  and  subduing 
grandeur  of  the  reformed  Ritual — throughout  the 
whole  from  first  to  last,  and  in  all  the  parts,  and 
amidst  all  other  diversities,  we  find  a  unity  and  iden- 
tity of  spirit  manifested  toward  those  acts  of  piety  and 
faith.  Combined  with  superstitions  as  it  sometimes 
has  been — and  shining  forth,  as  it  sometimes  does, 
from  amidst  errors  and  corruptions,  perversities  and 
abuses,  that  make  us  weep  for  the  dishonor  done  to 
the  Christian  name — yet  as  tested  by  its  regard  for 
these  institutions,  an  identity  of  spirit  throughout  the 
whole  history  of  the  Church  is  too  conspicuous  to  be 
mistaken  even  by  the  most  careless  reader. 

The  Sects,  on  the  contrary,  very  generally  prefer 
worship  with  an  extemporaneous  prayer.  It  is  thought 
that  a  stated  Liturgy  is  a  great  hindrance  to  the 
manifestations  of  the  spirit  among  them.  Their  piety 
is  better  promoted  without  than  with  a  stated  Form  of 
Common  Prayer. 


IX.]  THE    IDENTITY    OF    SPIRIT.  357 

§  15.    Another    point    intimately    con-  Thechurch'a 
nected  with  this  subject,  and  indeed  forming  rfgard  for  the 

J  "  Anmvcraartes 

a  part  of  it,  is  derived  from  the  regard  which  of  the  import- 

the  Church  has  always  paid  to  certain  days  ^^"3^". 

on  which  the  most  important  events  of  our 

Lord's  life  occurred — His  Birth,  His  Epiphany,  His 

Death,    His    Resurrection,    His    Ascension,    and    the 

coming  of  the  Holy  Ghost.     Let  it  be  admitted  that 

there   is  an  uncertainty  with  regard  to  the  day  on 

which  some  of  them  occurs.     Yet   there  is  no  such 

uncertainty  with  regard  to  the  others — the  Death,  the 

Resurrection,  the  Ascension,   and  the  coming  of  the 

Holy    Ghost.     Most   of   the    Sects   however   pay   no 

regard  to  those  days.     The  day  on  which  the  Blessed 

Lord  died  to  save  their  souls  from  the  bitter  pains  of 

eternal  death,  comes  in  the  annual  round  of  earthly 

affairs  ;  they  apparently  take  no  pains  to  identify  it ; 

they  feel  no  interest  in  observing  it  with  appropriate 

commemorations  ;  they  go  about  their  work  or  their 

pleasures  aa  if  they  were  no  part  of  the  race  for  which 

He    died.      And    if    perchance   they    meet   with   one 

whoso  heart  is  too  full  of  the  sad  recollections  with 

which   the    day    is   associated  to   "  eat   any   pleasant 

bread,"   or  to    pursue  his   ordinary   vocations   in   the 

world,  they  regard   his  feelings  as  superstitious.     On 

these   days  their  piety — the  spirit  that   is   in    them 

— does  not  incline  them  to  lay  aside  all  else,  to  forget 

all  temporal  oonoerns  and  indulge  the  feelings  that 

the  evenl  of  which  they  are  the  anniversaries,  inspires 

in  the  heart  ol  everj  devonl  bod  oftheChuroh. 

$   L0,    It   is  not,  however,   because  the  Sects  are 
opposed  to  commemorations  on  general  principles,  for 


358  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

The  sects  they  all  have  some  events  in  their  history 

also  keep  Ho- 

ly  Days  of  which  they  commemorate — some  founders 
their  own.  ancj  fathers  to  whom  they  look  back  with 
veneration.  There  have  been  some  strange  manifes- 
tations of  this  kind.  Thus  the  same  people  who  or- 
dered Christmas  to  be  kept  as  a  fast,  a  day  of  mourn- 
ing, can  commemorate  the  "Landing  of  the  Pilgrims" 
with  an  anniversary  festival.  And  in  general,  the 
Sects  show  a  disposition  to  impress  upon  the  minds  of 
their  members  the  importance  of  the  principal  events 
and  persons  in  their  history,  by  commemorations, 
festivities,  and  rejoicings,  just  as  the  Church  attempts 
to  impress  upon  the  minds  of  her  members  the  great 
events  in  the  history  of  her  origin — the  Birth,  the 
Death,  the  Resurrection,  and  the  Ascension  of  Her 
Lord,  and  the  coming  of  the  Holy  Grhost. 

§  17.  It   is   hardly  worth  the  while   to 

The  whole  * 

church  cannot  attempt   here  a  vindication  of  the   Church 

withsuperstt  agamst  tne  charge  which  is  brought  against 
tion  and  For-  it,  of  superstition  and  formality  in  these  re- 
spects. The  fault  of  superstition,  like  that 
of  idolatry,  consists  not  in  the  excess  of  affection — but 
in  a  mistake  in  regard  to  its  object.  It  is  idolatry  to 
bestow  upon  that  which  is  not  Grod  the  honor  and 
glory  due  to  Him.  It  is  superstition  to  bestow  upon 
human  devices  and  the  inventions  of  men,  relics  and 
institutions  not  mentioned  in  the  Scriptures,  the  re- 
gard which  genuine  piety  would  bestow  upon  those 
institutions  which  have  unquestionably  proceeded 
from  the  Lord  Himself.  Doubtless  there  has  been 
much  of  both,  superstition  and  idolatry,  in  the  Chris- 
tian as  well  as  the  Jewish   Church.     But  the  spirit 


IX.]  THE   IDENTITY   OF   SPIRIT.  359 

which  has  always  and  everywhere  been  manifested  in 
the  Christian  Church  in  all  of  the  ages  and  parts,  of 
which  we  know  anything,  cannot  be  regarded  either 
as  superstition  or  idolatry.  The  Comforter,  which  is 
the  Holy  Spirit,  was  promised  to  be  sent  to  the 
Church  and  to  abide  with  it  forever}  This  promise 
must  have  been  fulfilled  :  for  it  proceeded  from  Him 
"  whose  word  shall  not  return  to  Him  void,  but  shall 
accomplish  that  whereunto  He  sends  it."  That,  there- 
fore, which  has  always  been  held  in  the  Church 
"  always,  everywhere,  and  by  all"  cannot  be  contrary 
to  the  unity  of  the  spirit,  but  must  have  proceeded 
from  the  Spirit  of  Grod  Himself. 

S  18.  Now,  as  there  has  always  been  a  The  spirit  of 
unity  of  spirit  in  the  Church,  wherever  the  verse  from 
Church  itself  has  existed — notwithstanding  that    of  the 

°  Church. 

all  the  corruptions  that  have  prevailed  with- 
in its  pale,  and  all  the  misfortunes  that  have  oppressed 
and  disturbed  its  functions — so  among  the  Sects  there 
is  perhaps  in  one  sense  a  unity  of  spirit  diverse  from 
that  in  the  Church,  yet  for  the  most  part  there  is  an 
almost  endless  variety  of  manifestations  of  spirit 
among  them. 

S  19.  They  have,  each  of  them,  a  dis-  They  each 
tinct  standard  or  test  of  piety  of  their  own.  ag^ru.andTi 
I  need  not  enter  into  protracted  specifica-  standard  of 
tions.  Every  one  has  observed  the  difference  own. 
he t  ween  the  character  of  the  piety  of  the 
Methodists  and  the  Presbyterians  for  instance  :  a  dif- 
ference which  it  would  not  be  easy  to  characterise  in 

1  John  xiv.  16. 


360  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

words,  but  which  no  person  of  common  sagacity  could 
fail  to  observe  on  being  acquainted  with  the  religious 
experience  of  two  individuals  belonging  to  those  Sects 
respectively.  But  to  look  at  cases  which  are  still 
more  marked.  The  piety  of  a  Shaker — a  Second 
Advent  Believer — a  Latter  Day  Saint — manifests  it- 
self in  very  different  ways  from  that  of  a  Presbyterian, 
a  Lutheran,  a  Moravian,  or  a  Methodist.  And  within 
these  Sects  themselves,  it  is  also  judged  by  different 
standards  and  tests.  A  Methodist  whose  piety  did 
not  manifest  itself  by  groans  and  responses  in  the 
time  of  prayer — a  Shaker  that  could  not  dance, 
"  moving  about  with  extraordinary  transport,  singing 
and  making  a  perfect  charm  " — a  Second  Advent  Be- 
liever who  did  not  think  that  "  the  time  of  the  end 
was  near  "  and  "  the  judge  at  the  door,"  or  a  Latter 
Day  Saint  who  did  not  acknowledge  the  inspiration 
of  Joseph  Smith,  and  the  genuineness  of  the  engraved 
Tables  which  he  claims  to  have  discovered — would 
hardly  be  regarded  by  those  Sects  respectively  as 
possessed  of  genuine  piety. 

Thus  each  Sect  has  a  spirit  of  its  own,  and  yet 
different  from  that  of  the  Church :  a  kind  of  piety 
peculiar  to  itself  which  can  be  identified  as  well  as 
the  visible  existence  of  the  sect,  and  which  makes  up 
a  part  of  its  identity. 

§  20.  So  it  is  in  the  Church.  There  is 
ofChurchmen  something  in  the  spirit  of  the  devout  and 
easily    distin-  intelligent  Churchman  which   science   may 

guished.  J 

fail  to  analyse  and  words  may  be  insufficient 
to  describe,  but  which  enables  us  to  distinguish  him 
as   soon  as  we    become    acquainted   with   him,   and 


IX.]  THE   IDENTITY    OF    SPIRIT.  361 

wherever  we  may  meet  him.  There  is  something  in 
the  books  of  devotion  and  edification  which  have  been 
written  by  Churchmen — aside  from  all  the  peculiar- 
ities of  doctrine — by  which  we  can  recognize  at  once 
the  identity  of  the  Spirit.  The  more  eminent  and 
distinguished  the  members  of  the  different  ages  and 
parts  of  the  Church  which  we  take  for  illustrations, 
the  more  conspicuous  does  this  identity  of  spirit  be- 
come— the  more  do  they  have  in  common  with  each 
other,  and  the  less  of  the  peculiarities  of  their  age  and 
nation.  The  writings  of  the  early  Fathers  could  be 
used  from  our  Pulpits  without  presenting  any  contra- 
diction either  in  doctrine  or  in  spirit  to  what  is  con- 
tained in  our  Liturgy.  And  the  works  of  Fenelon 
and  A'Kempis,  though  distinguished  members  of  the 
Romish  Communion,  are  prized  as  devotional  guides 
by  all  who  have  sought  a  practical  acquaintance  with 
works  of  that  kind. 

§  21.  I  will  not  here  undertake  to  ac-  The  Si^ni" 
count  for  this  difference  between  the  Church  difference  be- 
and  the  Sects  in  their  regard  for  the  outward  l,™66"  th! 

°  Church  and 

Institutions  and  Ordinances  of  religion  and  the  sects. 
in  their  tests  of  the  genuineness  of   conversion  and 
piety. 

But  it  is  difficult  to  understand  why  any  persons 
should  disparage  institutions  and  means  of  grace  which 
they  do  not  doubt  that  they  possess.  If  they  were 
conscious  of  being  without  them,  or  in  a  condition  to 
have  only  the  form  without  the  validity  and  spiritual 
grace,  we  should  expect  them  to  believe  and  teach 
either  as  a  cause  or  as  a  result  of  their  position,  that 

they  are  of  no  essential  importance. 
16 


362  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Again :  there  is  always  an  advantage,  in  a  secta- 
rian point  of  view,  in  making  the  test  of  piety,  some- 
thing inward  and  subjective — for  in  that  case,  persons 
are  committed  to  nothing  that  is  permanent  and 
unchangeable — but  they  can  always  adapt  themselves 
to  the  inclinations  of  men  and  change  from  time  to 
time  to  suit  the  spirit  of  the  age. 

The  Protes-  §  22.  Such  differences  are  there  between 
c^urcHS- tne  spirit  that  is  in  the  Sects  and  that  which 
cai  m  spirit  is  in  the  Church.  So  different  is  the  piety 
church  of  of  the  two  different  classes  of  persons.  In 
chnst.  an  this  we  doubt  not  their  sincerity,  or  their 

good  intentions.  And  I  have  introduced  the  subject 
for  no  purpose  of  pointing  an  argument,  or  of  drawing 
an  unfavorable  conclusion  against  them.  I  have  spoken 
of  it  for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  that  body,  which 
I  have  historically  identified  as  the  branch  of  the 
Church  of  Christ  in  this  country,  claims  to  manifest, 
and  is  accused  of  manifesting,  that  sentiment  toward 
the  Church — even  in  regard  to  its  undeniable  faults 
and  corruptions — which  both  nature  and  Revelation 
teach  us  to  expect,  if  there  really  exists  the  identity 
between  them  which  we  have  traced  out ;  and  that  its 
sympathies  are  with  the  Church,  as  tested  by  its  most 
important  Institutions  and  its  most  characteristic  Ob- 
servances. And  by  this  train  of  thought  it  must  ap- 
pear, as  I  think — taking  the  claims  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  and  the  accusations  of  those  opposed 
to  it  (concurring  as  they  do  in  this  point)  as  the  pre- 
mises from  which  our  conclusion  is  drawn — that  there 
is  an  identity  of  spirit  as  well  as  of  body  clearly  traced 
between  the  branch  of  the  Church  in  this  country  and 
the  original  Vine. 


IX]  THE   IDENTITY   OF   SPIRIT.  363 

$  23.  Now  this  identity  of  spirit — that     Thig  Iden. 
which  has  been   held   always,  everywhere,  tuy  Pr°duced 

by    the    Holy 

and  by  all  in  the  Church — is  the  fruit  of  the  Ghost  in  the 
Spirit  of  God  in  the  Church.  And  whatever  Churcb* 
any  particular  Church  has  more  than  this  is  peculiar 
to  itself,  and  therefore,  not  catholic;  and  whatever 
any  one  may  have  that  is  contrary  to  it,  is  opposed  to 
Christ. 

$  25.  I  think  that  I  have  now  shown,      *»  Testi" 

mony  of  Ex- 

that  if  one  wishes  to  perform  all  the  duties  penence. 
commanded  in  the  Scriptures,  to  enjoy  the  unity  of 
the  Spirit  in  the  bonds  of  peace,  and  to  have  the  satis- 
faction of  knowing  that  he  is  a  co-worker  together 
with  God  in  the  work  of  human  salvation,  or  to  give 
himself  up  in  a  life  of  devotion  to  Him  who  gave  Him- 
self for  the  world  ;  this  may  be  done  without  fear  of 
mistake  or  failure,  by  any  of  the  inhabitants  of  this 
Republic,  in  what  is  here  called  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church.  I  have  pointed  out  a  communion  in 
which  my  fellow-travellers  to  eternity  may  find  rest  for 
their  souls,  with  every  assurance  of  the  blessings  of  the 
Spirit  and  the  enjoyment  of  the  favor  of  God,  which 
the  nature  of  the  case  permits  us  to  have.  I  could 
easily  refer  to  experience,  which  attests  the  existence 
and  reality  of  all  that  our  course  of  investigation  may 
have  led  us  to  expect.  The  joy  and  hope  and  peace 
of  those  who  have  drunk  into  her  Spirit,  are  too  deep 
and  tranquil  to  attract  the  observation  of  the  heedless 
and  the  noisy.  But  her  "  heavenly  ways,  sweet  com- 
munions, and  solemn  vows"  are  being  daily  more  and 
more  appreciated  and  Bought  after;  and  wanderers, 
weary  of  the   turmoil   and    burthen  of  the   world,  or 


364  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap.  IX 

sick  of  the  strifes,  the  instability,  and  the  ever  vary- 
ing changes  of  sectarianism,  are  returning  for  a  home, 
and  for  rest,  in  her  bosom. 

It  is  ascertained  that  out  of  fifteen  hundred  clergy 
in  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  this  country, 
over  three  hundred,  or  about  one-fifth  have  been  minis- 
ters in  some  of  the  other  denominations.  One  of  them 
thus  writes  of  his  change  : — 

"  My  answer  to  the  Dissenter  is,  who,  but  a  Church- 
man, that  has  tasted  the  great  delights  of  the  sanctu- 
ary, can  appreciate  the  Church's  excellence  ?  My 
vindication  to  the  Churchman,  is,  who  but  the  soul 
that  has  been  'tossed  up  and  down  like  a  locust'  upon 
1  the  winds  of  doctrine '  and  the  sea  of  Sects,  can  un- 
derstand the  mazes,  the  dangers,  the  under-currents, 
and  the  disasters  of  sectarianism  ?  Sectarians,  you 
know  nothing  of  the  Church's  blessings !  Church- 
men, you  know  nothing  of  Sectarianism's  mischiefs  ! " 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE  MORAL  DESIGN  OF  THE  CHURCH,  AND  THE  EFFECTS 

OF  SECTARIANISM. 

There  is,  perhaps,  but  little  in  the  moral  design  of 
the  Church  which  will  help  us  to  identify  it ;  but  there 
is  much  in  that  design  which  will  tend  to  increase 
very  much  our  estimate  of  the  importance  of  identify- 
ing it.  Therefore  I  devote  a  few  pages  to  this  subject. 
$  1.  In  my  introductory  chapter  I  have  only  those 
spoken  of  the  importance  of  the  identity  of  which"tmpiy 
the  Church  as  manifested  by  several  very  ^entity. 
plain  and  obvious  considerations,  arising  chiefly  out  of 
our  duties  and  obligations  to  the  Church.  I  shall  now 
refer  ohiefly  to  the  benefits  which  the  Church  was  de- 
signed to  bestow  upon  us.  And  in  selecting  them,  I 
shall  make  do  mention  of  those  which  have  no  direct 
relation  to  the  main  subjeot  in  hand — the  identity  of 
the  Church.  Stosl  <>r  all  the  benefits  of  the  Church, 
which  in  the  common  sectarian  view,  are  presented 
to  our  minds,  do  by  no  means  imply  its  identity.  They 

may  result    from    any   church — any    mere    human   or 

voluntary  association    of  men  for  the  purposes  of  wor- 
ship, instruction,  mutual  edification  and  helpfulness, 


366  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

as  well  as  from  the  Church  which  our  Blessed  Lord 
founded  in  His  own  blood.  There  is  always  strength 
in  associations.  If  the  members  are  united  and  har- 
monious, the  strength  of  their  influences  both  upon 
themselves  and  upon  others,  increases  much  faster  by 
the  increase  of  their  numbers,  than  the  numerical  pro- 
portion. A  society  of  one  thousand  members  is  far 
more  than  ten  times  as  strong  as  one  with  only  a  hun- 
dred. There  is  an  increase  of  wisdom  in  counsel — an 
increase  of  moral  power  in  forming  the  characters  of 
the  members  to  a  uniformity  with  one  another  and 
with  their  ideal — and  a  vast  increase  in  the  impres- 
sion which  they  make  upon  others. 

But  of  these  things  I  shall  not  speak  here,  because 
they  result  from  the  very  nature  of  an  association  of 
men,  and  not  from  any  peculiarity  of  its  origin. 

$  2.  The  first  element  in  the  moral  design  of  the 
Church  that  I  shall  remark  upon,  is  its  relation  to 
Divine  Truth. 
The  church        This    element  is   very  clearly  indicated 

"^  by  St-  Paul  when  writillS  to  Timothy.  He 
Tmth.  calls  the  Church  "  the  Pillar  and  Ground  of 

the  Truth." 

The  church  $  3.  By  recurring  to  its  history  it  will 
instituted  be-  De  seen  that  the  Church  was  instituted  be- 
tureswereM  the  Scriptures  of  Divine  Truth  were 
written.  written.  We  first  read  of  the  Church  as 
already  in  existence  on,  or  immediately  after  the  day 
of  Pentecost,  in  the  common  computation  a.  d.,  33. 
But  no  portion  of  the  New  Testament  Scriptures  were 

I  1  Tim.  3,  15. 


X.]  EFFECTS   OF   SECTARIANISM.  367 

written  until  several  years  after  that  date.  And  when 
they  were  written  it  was  in  the  Church  and  by  its  mem- 
bers ;  and  they  were  committed  to  the  Church  for  use 
and  for  transmission. 

$  4.  The  whole  value  of  the  Scriptures     The  value 

r  of  the   Scrip- 

to  us  depends  upon  our  having  them  as  they  tures  depends 

ft,■,  c    .  .       ..  Tr.  upon  their 

om  the  pen  01   inspiration.     11  any  genuineness. 

part  has  been  lost  the  loss  is  irreparable.     If  anything 

has  been  added  to  them,  or  anything  changed  in  their 

contents,   it   becomes  unsafe  to   rely  upon  what  we 

have,  as  the  word  of  God.     Before,  therefore,  we  can 

make  any  use  of  the  Scriptures  which  we  now  have, 

as  an   authority  for  doctrine   or   for   duty,  we   must 

identify  them  with  those  that  were  at  first  given  by 

the  inspiration  of  God. 

$  5.  We  may  learn  from  external  testimony     The  Church 

and   from  heathen  writers,  enough  to  prove  the  only  P,oof 

,.  ,  t         i     i-        i     •      of  their  identi- 

that   such   a   person   as   our   Lord   lived  in  ty  and  genu- 
Judea  at  the  time  designated  in  the  Scrip- iQenes9- 
tores — that  He  taught  a  new  religion  and  founded  a 
Church,  and  that  some  Scriptures  containing  His  doc- 
trines were  written  by  his  disciples.     But  no      The   Hea. 

oopies  of  the  Scriptures  then  written,  have  the" have Pre" 
*  i  i      tt      i  s.  rved  no  co- 

been  preserved  by  the   Heathen.     They  are  plea  of   ti.o 

not   mentioned   by  name,  enumerated,    dc-  bcr,Pturea- 

scribed,  or  quoted    by  heathen   writers,  so  as  that  we 

cm  compare,  the  Soiiptores  which  we  now  have,  with 

what  wafl  thru  written.      Depending  upon  this  source 

then,  we  are  but  Little,  it'  any  better  off,  than  as  though 

W6  did  QOl   know  that  a  Ihblc  had  ever  hern  written — 

tor  we  have  do  means  of  ascertaining  thai   what  we 

have  came  from  our  Lord  or  His  Apostles. 


368  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  .  |Chap. 

Nor  shall  we  fare  much  better  if  we  turn  from  the 
heathen  to  the  Christian  Sects.  By  their  very  posi- 
tion, the  Sects  were  incapacitated  from  being  compe- 
tent witnesses  to  the  genuineness  and  identity  of  the 
Scriptures.  For  not  only  their  doctrines,  but  the  very 
step  which  they  had  taken,  and  which  brought  them 
into  existence  as  Sects,  were  condemned  by  the  Scrip- 
tures. This  they  knew  and  felt.  Hence  they  would 
be  strongly  tempted  to  corrupt  the  Scriptures,  in 
order  that  they  might  bear  no  testimony  against 
them. 

And  this   is  not   a  mere  conjecture  of 

The  Early  •  J 

sects  corrupt-  what  they  might  do,  and  would  be  likely  to 
ed  the  scrip-  do      But  ft  ig  known  that  they  actually  did 

do  it.  Many  spurious  works  were  produced 
and  circulated  among  the  early  sects  as  the  works  of 
the  Apostles.  Some  of  the  genuine  works  were  inter- 
polated and  badly  corrupted ;  and  others  rejected 
altogether.  So  that  if  we  were  left  to  depend-  upon 
them  we  could  no  where  find  a  pure  and  unadulter- 
ated copy  of  the  Scriptures. 

On  the  contrary,  all  the  genuine  productions  of  the 
Apostles  would  be  received  and  carefully  preserved 
by  the  Church.  Their  chief  desire  was  to  know  the 
truth  and  the  whole  truth.  They  had  no  tempta- 
tions to  corrupt  the  writings  of  the  Apostles.  Those 
writings  were  constantly  used  in  their  daily  and 
weekly  worship.  They  were  freely  andy  fully  quoted 
in  the  writings  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  whose 
works  have  come  down  to  us.  And  it  is  said,  that  if 
the  Bible,  as  a  distinct  book,  were  now  entirely  lost, 
it  could  be  restored  by  collecting  the  quotations  made 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF   SECTARIANISM.  369 

from  it  in  the  early  Fathers  of  the  Church,  and  put- 
ting them  together  in  a  volume.  Of  course,  therefore, 
by  comparing  the  Bible  we  now  have  with  what  we 
find  there  quoted,  we  can  ascertain  whether  the 
Bible  is  precisely  the  same  as  it  was  then  :  in  other 
words,  we  can  identify  our  Bible  with  that  of  the 
early  Church,  and  so  with  that  which  the  inspired 
Prophets,  Evangelists,  and  Apostles  wrote. 

Strike  out  of  existence,  then,  the  testimony  of  the 
Church  and  its  members,  and  leave  the  inquirer  to 
what  he  can  find  out  of  its  pale  alone,  among  hea- 
then writers  and  outside  sects,  and  it  is  very  doubt- 
ful whether  he  could  find  a  copy  of  the  Scriptures 
anywhere  in  existence  at  all.  He  certainly  could 
have  no  satisfactory  proof  that  he  was  in  possession 
of  all  that  had  been  written  for  the  guidance  and 
instruction  of  man,  by  the  inspiration  of  God.  He 
could  not  know  that  what  he  had,  is  the  work  of  the 
Apostles  and  others  to  whom  it  is  attributed.  He  could 
not  know  but  that  what  we  have,  has  been  so  grossly 
corrupted  as  to  be  totally  unlike  what  it  was  when 
it  came  from  the  pen  that  was  gukled  by  inspiration. 
On  the  contrary,  knowing  as  we  do  how  the  early 
sects,  the  Ebionites,  the  Gnostics,  the  Montanisis, 
&0.,  fee.,  Corrupted  the  Scriptures,  we  could  not  doubt 
that,  if  we  had  only  what  is  derived  to  us  through 
Bach  sources,  that  which  we  might  possess  would 
have  been  so  much  corrupted  as  to  be  no  safe  guide 
to  practice — no  sure  ground  of  hope.  Bui  in  the 
Church  the  Script  mvs  were  first  received.      By  it  they 

have  been  kept,  reverenced  and  used.     In  the  early 

Fathers  they  were  fully  and  freely  quoted,  and  by 

Hi* 


370  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

this  means  the  Word  of  God  has   been  kept  for  us, 
and  we  know  that  what  we  have  is  the  Word  of  Gtod. 

Thevaiueof  *  ^'  ^u*  ^le  value  of  this  testimony 
the  church's  depends  upon  the  identity  of  the  Church. 
pen™0nyupot  If>  instead  of  thq  testimony  of  the  Church, 
the  identity  of  we  took  that  of  the    Ebionites,  we  should 

the  Church. 

have  a  corrupt  copy  of  St.  Matthew's  Gos- 
pel, as  our  only  account  of  our  Lord's  life,  and  none 
of  the  writings  of  St.  Paul.  If  we  took  that  of  the 
Gnostics,  we  should  be  without  the  best  proofs  of  the 
Divinity  of  Christ.  So  with  each  of  the  Sects.  Did 
we  rely  upon  their  testimony  alone,  we  should  have  a 
copy  of  the  Scriptures  modified  and  altered  to  accom- 
modate and  inculcate  their  errors,  instead  of  the  truth 
as  it  is  in  Jesus.  But  the  Church  has  had  neither 
motives,  disposition,  nor  opportunity  to  corrupt  them. 
And  more  than  this,  we  know  from  history  that  the 
Sects  did  corrupt  the  copies  which  they  received,  and 
that  the  Church  did  not. 

Thechurch  $'7.  But  this  is  not  all — these  early 
a  witness  to  Fathers,  by  whose  writings  we  are  able  to 

the  true  inter-  . 

pretation  o  f  identify  the  Scriptures,  contain  such  doc- 
e _cnptures.  £rjna]  statements  and  discussions  as  enable 
us  to  see  how  Christianity  was  then  understood.  "  The 
faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints "  was  explained  to 
them  in  all  of  the  Churches  founded  by  the  Apostles 
— that  is,  in  Churches  scattered  over  nearly  the  whole 
of  the  then  known  world — before  they  had  received  the 
Scriptures  at  all,  and  in  many  cases  before  any  part 
of  them  was  written.  Some  formularies,  or  confes- 
sions of  faith — "  forms  of  sound  words"1  existed  and 

1  2  Tim.  i.  13. 


X]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  371 

were  in  use  as  bonds  of  union  and  baptismal  confes- 
sions from  the  very  commencement  of  those  Churches. 
Perhaps  no  one  of  these  can  now  be  found  precisely 
as  it  then  existed,  yet  divers  of  them  we  do  find  in  all 
the  Churches  founded  by  the  Apostles.  They  are  quoted, 
discussed,  and  explained,  as  of  authority,  in  all  the 
earlier  writers  from  Alexandria  and  Carthage  to 
Byzantium,  and  from  Jerusalem  and  Antioch  to  Lyons 
in  the  west.  We  have  also  the  early  Canons  of  Dis- 
cipline and  the  Liturgies  of  their  Worship.  We  have 
the  writings  of  Clement,  whose  name  was  in  the  book 
of  life,1  of  Ignatius,  the  friend  and  companion  of  St. 
Peter,  of  Polycarp,  the  disciple  of  St.  John,  of  Ter- 

TULLIAN,    Of  IREN^US,   of    JuSTIN    MaRTYR,    of    CLEMENT 

of  Alexandria,  of  Cyprian,  and  of  Eusebius,  who 
wrote  a  history  of  the  Church  from  its  foundation  to 
his  days,  a.  d.  325. 

Now  from  these  writings  we  can  ascertain  how 
Christianity  was  understood,  what  the  Scriptures 
were  thought  to  contain,  and  how  their  contents  were 
explained,  as  well  as  we  can  learn  from  the  writings 
of  Calvin  and  Beza,  and  the  early  Presbyterians,  how 
Christianity  was  understood  by  them. 

Thus  we  have  an  independent  testimony,  an  ex- 
traneous witness  to  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints,  coming  down  to  us  in  the  Church  from  the  very 
age  in  whiob  the  Scriptures  were  written.  It  is  of 
oonrse  imperfect,  but  yet  eufnoienl  to  enable  us  to 
identify  the  Faith  as  well  as  the  Script  ores.  All  the 
salient    points   and    leading   doctrines   of  Christianity 


1  I'liil.  iv.  3. 


372  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

are  stated  with  sufficient  distinctness.  And  these 
writings  show  that  the  same  system  was  delivered 
everywhere  :  arid  on  all  these  great  and  leading  points 
there  is  a  perfect  harmony  and  agreement.  They  speak 
of  the  Faith  as  a  historic  thing,  which  had  once  been 
delivered  to  them,  which  they  must  keep  and  hand 
down  to  others  ;  and  not  as  something  which  they  had 
invented,  or  adopted  by  agreement  and  compact  among 
themselves,  nor  yet  as  something  that  each  individual 
had  been  left  to  discover  for  himself  by  his  own  in- 
vestigations and  the  exercise  of  his  private  judgment. 
The  early  And  m  a^  the  earlier  writers,  when  a 
mode  of  set-  question  arose  concerning  any  doctrine,  or  a 

tling  questions      #  .  . 

of  interpreta-  dispute  with  the  heretics  called  forth  a  de- 
tlon"  fence   of  the   truth,  the  appeal  was  not  as 

now,  to  philology,  to  hermeneutics,  to  reason  and  to  logic, 
but  to  the  doctrine,  or  mode  of  explaining  a  doctrine 
or  passage  of  Scripture  which  had  been  preserved  in 
those  Churches  that  had  been  founded  by  the  Apostles 
in  person,  and  received  an  explanation  of  Christianity 
from  their  own  living  lips. 
tkrtul-        As  a  specimen  of  this  kind  of  reason- 

h  i  a  n   quoted  * 

as  a  specimen,  ing,  take  the  following  from  Tertullian's 
Prescription  against  Heretics}  "  On  this  principle, 
therefore,  we  shape  our  rule,  that  if  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  sent  the  Apostles  to  preach,  no  others  ought  to 
be  received  as  preachers  than  those  whom  Christ  ap- 
pointed. .  .  .  Now  what  they  did  preach,  that  is,  what 
Christ  did  reveal  unto  them,  I  will  here  also  rule, 
must  be  proved  in  no  other  way  than  by  those  same 

1  §  xxi.  1  quote  the  Oxford  Translation  of  1842. 


X.]  EFFECTS   OF   SECTARIANISM.  373 

Chunhes  which  the  Apostles  themselves  founded; 
themselves,  I  say,  by  preaching'  to  them  by  the  living 
voice,  as  aftemvards  by  Epistles.  If  these  things  be 
so,  it  becometh  forthwith  manifest,  that  all  doctrine, 
which  agreeth  with  these  Apostolic  Churches,  the 
wombs  and  originals  of  the  Faith,  must  be  accounted 
true,  as  without  doubt  containing  that  which  the 
Churches  have  received  from  the  Apostles,  the  Apos- 
tles from  Christ,  and  Christ  from  (rod  ;  and  that  all 
other  doctrine  must  be  judged  at  once  to  be  false, 
which  sovveth  things  contrary  to  the  truth  of  the 
Churches,  and  of  the  Apostles,  and  of  Christ,  and  of 
God.  It  remaineth,  therefore,  that  we  show  whether 
this  our  doctrine,  the  rule  of  which  we  have  above 
declared,  be  derived  from  the  tradition  of  the  Apos- 
tles, and  from  this  very  fact,  whether  the  other  doc- 
trines come  of  falsehood.  We  have  communion  with 
the  Apostolic  Churches  because  we  have  no  doctrine 
differing  from  than.     Tins  is  evidence  of  truth." 

The  reasons  for  this  rule,  as  Tertullian  says,  are 
various.  In  the  first  place,  the  Heretics  do  not  re- 
ceive the  entire  and  uncorrnpted  Scriptures.  But 
secondly,  the  Scriptures  were  never  given  to  them: 
they  have  DO  ri^'lit  to  the  use  of  them:  and  without 
llie  Scriptures  we  prove  that  they  have  no  right  to 
the  Scriptures  as  an  authority  for  what  they  <l<>  : 
and  finally,  by  putting  ;i  meaning  upon  them  different 
from  that  which  they  were  intended  to  have,  they 
confound  and  mislead  the  simple  and  unlearned,  and 

make  the  G*OSpe1  itself  to  convey,  only  at  be8t,  an  un- 
certain sound,  and  peO]  le  will  not  know  what  to  be- 
lieve. 


374  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

There  is  a  pregnant  text  to  this  point  in  St. 
Paul's  second  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  : '  "  There- 
fore, brethren,  stand  fast,  and  hold  the  traditions 
which  ye  have  been  taught,  whether  by  word,  or  our 
epistle." 

The  Author-        When    this  was   written   the    Thessalo- 
ity  of  st.  Paul.  njans  h^  no  parj-  Qf  fae  Scriptures  except 

St.  Paul's  first  Epistle  to  them.  They  had,  however, 
"  the  Faith,"  and  were  directed  to  hold  that  fast  even 
as  it  had  been  taught  to  them  orally — "  by  the  living 
voice,"  as  Tertullian  says.  Other  passages  of  similar 
import  might  be  quoted  from  the  New  Testament. 

But  I  do  not  design  to  dwell  on  this  part  of  my 
subject.  Different  men  will  of  coarse  attach  very 
different  measures  of  importance  to  this  kind  of  testi- 
mony or  authority.  But  call  its  value  what  we  may, 
either  a  controlling  and  ultimate  authority,  from  which 
there  may  be  no  appeal — or  nothing  ;  or  place  it  any- 
where between  those  extremes  as  we  please,  the  fact 
itself,  that  we  can  thus  learn  from  the  early  records 
of  the  Church  what  was  received  as  Christianity, 
admits  of  no  denial. 

It  may  be  difficult  to  say  precisely  to  what  de- 
gree of  minuteness  we  might  descend  in  specifying 
the  points  of  Christian  Doctrine,  which  can  thus  be 
proved  from  the  early  Fathers  to  have  been  delivered 
to  the  Church  by  the  Apostles.  This  much  we  may 
say,  at  least,  that  man  is  in  a  fallen  and  depraved 
condition  by  nature,  and  needs  forgiveness — renewal ; 
that  in  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  there  are  three  dis- 

1  2  Thess.  ii.  16. 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  375 

tinct  Persons,  the  Second  of  whom  was  incarnate  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,  suffered  as  an  atonement  for  us  ;  and 
that  the  Third,  was  sent  to  sanctify  the  hearts  of  them 
that  believe  ;  that  thus  salvation  was  freely  offered  to 
all  men,  and  all  are  capable,  by  the  divine  grace,  of  re- 
ceiving it ;  that  sin  and  depravity  are  washed  away  in 
Baptism ;  that  the  spiritual  effects  of  Christ's  incarna- 
tion  are  conveyed  to  us  in  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
Supper ;  that  a  Ministry  was  established  to  have 
charge  and  oversight  of  the  believers;  that  respect, 
obedience  and  support  are  due  unto  them  for  Christ's 
sake  ;  that  there  should  be  a  resurrection  from  the 
dead,  and  a  final  judgment  according  to  the  deeds 
done  in  the  body. 

$  8.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  in  these  early      The   early 
writings  we  find   nothing  on   many  of  the  Church  "nan- 

.  11-1  imous  on   all 

points  that  now  agitate  the  world  with  con-  the  great 
troversies,   because  those  points  do  not  an-  ^°.int9   of 

1  r     Christianity. 

peal  to  have  been  thought  of  or  suggested 
tor  discussion  by  any  body.  But  most  unquestionably 
all  that  is  necessary  to  salvation,  all  that  has  come 
from  God,  was  then  known  ;  for  we  can  have  nothing 
that  was  not  given  to  the  Christians  of  that  age  and 
has  not  come  down  to  us  through  them.  And  on  all 
the  points  named  above,  and  a  great  many  more,  there 
i-  the  mod  perfect  harmony  and  uniformity  of  teach- 
ing in  all  parts  of  the  early  Churoh — in  those  that 
were   the   mosl   remote  and  disconnected    from  each 

Other,  as  well    as  in  those  thai  were  adjacent  and  more 

immediately  affiliated. 

It  is  then  undoubtedly  oertain  thai  we  are  indebted 
t<»   the  Churoh  ton  tin-  preservation  of  the  Scriptures 


376  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

whole  and  uncorrupted,  and  that  we  must  depend 
upon  the  Church,  and  upon  that  wholly  and  exclu- 
sively, for  our  certainty  that  what  we  have  is  the 
Scripture,  as  it  was  "  given  by  the  inspiration  of  Grod," ! 
the  source  and  fountain  of  Divine  Truth.  We  are 
indebted  to  the  Church  for  the  preservation  of  that 
which  "  containeth  all  things  necessary  to  salvation." 
And  we  learn  from  the  Church  too,  what  are  the  great 
facts  and  doctrines  which  it  was  understood  to  con- 
tain, and  was  explained  to  contain  by  those  who  wrote 
it. 

$  9.  Was  there  no  moral  design  in  this  ?  Does  not 
this  chain  of  facts  give  force  and  significancy  to  such 
passages  of  Scripture  as  these.  "  The  Church  of  the 
Living  G-od,  the  Pillar  and  Ground  of  the  Truth?" 
"  Hold-  fast  the  form  of  sound  words  which  thou  hast 
learned?"  "  Stand  fast  and  hold  the  traditions  which 
ye  have  been  taught,  whether  by  word  or  our  Epis- 
tles ?  "  "  If  he  neglect  to  hear  the  Church  let  him  be 
unto  thee  as  an  heathen  man  and  publican  ?  " 

The  au-        The  authority  of  the  Church  in  matters 
thority  of  the  0f  faith,   is   based   upon  this  element  of  its 

Church  based 

upon  its  moral  moral  design.     The  necessity  for  it  is  seen 
in  the  diversities  and  distractions   that  pre- 
vail in  Christendom. 

k  10.  It  is  true  there  are  some  that  call  themselves 
Christians,  who,  in  our  day,  reject  a  part  of  the  Scrip- 
tures :  and  the  Papists  have  added  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment Canon  what  we  call  the  Apocrypha.  Still, 
however,    the    main   disagreement  is  not  as  to   the 

1  2  Tim.  v.  16. 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  377 

genuineness  and  identity  of  the  Scriptures,  but  it  is 
in  the  mode  of  interpreting  them.  And  the  phe- 
nomena of  the  present  day  teach  us  that  some  Rule  of 
Faith  or  interpretation  is  as  necessary,  not      some  au- 

,  .  .  ,  thority   neces- 

only  to  umlorniity,  but  even  to  a  reception  sary  to  secure 
of  the   saving  truths  of  the   gospel,  as  is  a  the right intei" 

D      '       7  pre  tat  ion  of 

preliminary  agreement  as  to  what  is  to  be  the  scriptures, 
received  as  the  Word  of  (tod,  and  the  ultimate  au- 
thority in  all  matters  of  faith.  Which  is  the  most 
perilous  ?  to  deny  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
which  we  have  is  the  work  of  St.  Paul,  or  any  other 
inspired  man,  or  to  deny  that  the  Scriptures  teach  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God,  consubstantial  with 
the  Father?  Which  is  the  worst,  to  deny  that  good 
works  are  necessary  to  salvation  according  to  the 
Soriptures,  or  to  declare  the  Epistle  of  St.  James  an 
Epistle  of  Straw,  and  a  lie  against  the  Holy  Ghost? 
Is  it  worse  to  reject  the  Book  of  Revelations,  than  to 
deny  that  the  l>ihle  teaches  the  future  punishment 
of  the  wicked?  Which  may  the  best  be  added  to 
tbe  Scriptures — the  writings  of  Swedenborg,  or  the 
theory  of  Calvin,  .is  an  interpretation  of  them  ?  Why 
is  the  reception  of  the  book  of  Mormon  any  worse  than 
the  modern  Irvingite  theory  of  restoring  the  Aposto- 
lus and  miraculous  gifts  of  the  Spirit  to  the  Church? 
The  practice  of  the  early  sects  was  to  reject  the  por- 
tions of  Scripture  whioh  were  understood  to  contain 
doctrines  which  they  would  ooi  receive — that  of  the 
Moderns,  is  tin-  more  subtle  course  of  denying  thai 
those  Soriptures  contain  the  doctrines,  tad  thus  the. 
atiousness   of    private  judgment    has    filled    the 


378  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

world  with  as  many  errors  almost  as  there  are  varieties 
in  the  human  mind. 

I  will  not  here  pause  to  sav  that  all  these  contra- 
dictory doctrines  cannot  be  true  or  safe.  It  is  more 
to  my  present  purpose  to  say  that  they  involve  a  rejec- 
tion of  the  Church,  which  is  the  Pillar  and  Ground 
of  the  Truth,  and  the  necessity  of  regarding  those 
who  do  thus  reject  it  "as  heathen  men  and  publi- 
cans,"— even  when  the  awful  sanction  "  whatsoever 
ye  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven  "  hangs 
over  us. 

If,  then,  it  is  true  that  no  other  church  can  certify 
us  of  the  genuineness  and  identy  of  those  Scriptures 
which  were  at  first  given  by  the  inspiration  of  Grod, 
and  are  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correc- 
tion, for  instruction  in  righteousness  ;  it  is  no  less 
true,  that  no  other  has  preserved  to  us,  or  could  pre- 
serve to  us,  that  interpretation  which  was  at  first  put 
upon  them,  and  which,  if  we  would  be  guided  into 
the  truth,  we  must  now  believe.  If  there  is  now 
a  doubt  about  the  Divinity  of  Christ,  the  freedom  ol 
salvation  for  all  men,  the  remission  of  sins  in  Bap- 
tism, the  necessity  of  good  works  to  salvation,  the 
future  punishment  of  the  finally  impenitent,  the  three- 
fold order  of  the  ministry,  the  necessity  of  commu- 
nion in  the  Church  established  by  our  Lord  and  His 
Apostles ;  there  was  certainly  no  doubt  or  uncertainty 
on  these  points,  "  while,"  in  the  language  of  Tertul- 
lian,  "  all  were  Apostolic,  because  all  were  one." 
These  things  without  the  Scriptures  can  be  proved  to 
have  been  taught  by  the  Apostles  "  by  word,"  even 
before  the  Scriptures  themselves  were  written.     And 


X]  EFFECTS   OF    SECTARIANISM.  379 

it  deserves  to  be  considered  by  him  who  would  receive 
and  hold  "  the  Faith  once  delivered  to  the  Saints  " 
whole  and  undenled,  whether,  and  if  so,  when,  and 
on  what  grounds,  the  command  to  stand  fast  and  hold 
the  traditions  which  ye  have  been  taught,  whether  by 
word  or  by  our  epistle,1  has  been  abrogated. 

$  11.  We  ought  to  be  a  little  more  de-  what  tra- 
finite  on  this  point.  I  am  constructing  no  ^°en3  me  of 
argument  for  traditions,  outside  the  Scrip- 
tures in  general,  but  only  for  those  which  are  clearly 
seen  and  known  to  have  come  from  the  Apostolic 
age. 

The  Christian  world,  if  such  an  expression  may  be 
used,  may  be  divided  into  three  portions  in  relation  to 
this  point.  1.  The  Protestant  Sects,  who  hold  to  the 
Scriptures  as  interpreted  by  themselves,  and  each  one 
for  himself.  2.  The  Reformed  Churches,  who  hold 
to  the  Scriptures  as  they  were  interpreted  and  under- 
stood when  first  written  and  received  ;  and  3.  The 
Churches  in  the  Romish  obedience,  who  hold  to  the 
doctrine  of  Development. 

At  the  time  of  the  Reformation  the  conservative 
or  Papal  party  claimed  that  their  religion  was  the  old, 
and  that  the  Protestant  was  the  new  one.  On  the 
part  of  the  Church  of  England  this  point  was  stoutly 
denied]  and  issue  joined  with  tin;  Papists.  But  it 
was  then  found  thai  BO  many  copies  of  the  early  wri- 
tings had  bean  oorrupted,  and  that  there  wn-c  so  many 
forgeries  onrrenl  as  the  L^niimr  works  of  t ho  Fathers 
among  the  Romanists,  that  the  first  preliminary  step, 

1  2  Tbess.  ii.  13. 


380  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

and  one  of  indispensable  necessity,  was  to  identify 
the  works  of  the  Fathers,  to  distinguish  between  the 
genuine  and  the  spurious,  and  to  purge  out  all  inter- 
polations, and  to  restore  all  the  designed  or  accidental 
omissions  to  those  parts  that  were  undoubtedly  gen- 
uine. After  many  years  of  labor  and  of  controversy 
this  has  been  done,  and  both  parties  are  now  pretty 
nearly  agreed  as  to  the  identity  and  genuineness  of 
the  works  of  the  Fathers  to  which  we  may  appeal. 
And  what  has  been  the  result  ?  The  Romanists  have 
abandoned  the  controversy,  and  admitting  that  most 
of  their  peculiar  doctrines  are  new  and  modern,  they 
have  set  up  as  a  totally  new  ground  of  defence,  the 
position  that  they  have  a  right  to  make  additions  to 
the  Primitive  Faith,  or  in  other  words,  to  develop  and 
declare  from  time  to  time  new  doctrines,  which  had 
not  been  received  and  acknowledged  before. 

Hence  no  objection  to  the  view  which  has  now  been 
presented  of  this  function  of  the  Church  can  arise 
from  the  corruptions  and  darkness  of  the  middle  ages, 
or  from  the  present  position  and  claims  of  the  Romish 
Church.  The  field  is  clear,  and  we  can  look  above 
the  fogs  and  mists  of  intervening  centuries,  take  up 
the  writings  of  the  early  Fathers  just  as  they  left  them, 
and  see  through  the  in  what  Christianity  was  under- 
stood to  be  when  it  was  first  committed  to  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, and  "  written  for  our  learning." 

$   12.  We  claim  no  value   for  this  early 

Grounds  .  .  .     .  . 

upon  which  interpretation,  on  the  ground  that  the  men 
the  early  m-    ^  ^  ^  were  wiser  and  holier  than  the 

terpretati  o  n  s  ° 

are  considered  men  of  this,  nor  on  the   ground  that  they 
had  any  special  authority  binding  upon  us. 


X]  EFFECTS   OF   SECTARIANISM.  361 

But  it  is  simply  on  the  ground  that  their  mode  ot  inter- 
pretation, their  view  of  Christianity,  their  Creeds,  in 
short,  must  have  been  given  on  the  same  authority,  and 
by  the  same  persons,  and  in  most  cases  earlier  in  point 
of  time,  than  the  writing  of  the  Scriptures.  So  that 
in  the  language  of  the  profound  and  cautious  Thorn- 
dike,1  "  it  remains  that  we  affirm,  whatsoever  the 
whole  Church  from  the  beginning,  hath  received  and 
practiced  for  the  Rule  of  Faith  and  manners,  all  that 
to  be  evidently  true,  by  the  same  reason  for  which  we 
believe  the  very  Scriptures :  [to  be  the  word  of  God] 
and  therefore,  that  the  meaning  of  them  is  necessarily 
to  be  confined  within  those  bounds,  so  that  nothing 
must  be  admitted  for  the  truth  of  these  which  contra- 
dicteth  the  same,"  ["  the  Rule  of  Faith  and  man- 
ner- '| 

If  then  the  testimony  of  the  Church,  (and  we  have 
seen  that  we  have  nothing  else  to  rely  upon,)  is  suf- 
ficient to  satisfy  us  that  the  Scriptures  which  we  now 
have  are  the  Word  of  God,  ought  it  not  to  be  held 
sufficient  to  satisfy  us  that  those  doctrines  which  were 
then,  with  equal  unanimity,  plainness,  and  force,  de- 
clared to  be  their  true  interpretation  and  meaning,  are 
the  doctrines  which  we  ought  also  to  receive?  If  it 
satisfies  us  thatSts.  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John 
Wrote  the  Grospels  under  their  name,  ought  it  not  to 
Satisf)  us  thai  they  teach  that  t lie  Son  of  God  is  a 
proper  objeof  of  religious  worship?  If  it  satisfies  us 
that  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  contains  a  true  and  re- 
liahle  account  of  the  doings  and  sii)  iiil's  of  the  Apos- 

1  ISimtdpiM  of  tiki  Ckri$tim  Truth.    \\.  1.  chap  ri  §  1. 


382  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

ties,  as  far  as  it  goes,  ought  it  not  to  satisfy  us  that 
they  teach  us  that  Baptism  washes  away  sins  ?  If  it 
satisfies  us  that  St.  Paul  wrote  the  Epistles,  which 
bear  his  name,  ought  it  not  to  satisfy  us  that  they 
teach  that  the  Ministry  of  any  completely  organized 
Church  consists  of  three  orders,  Deacons,  Presbyters — 
and  in  Timothy  and  Titus,  some  one  officer  at  their 
head — call  him  Bishop,  or  what  you  will  ? 

But  be  this  as  it  may,  the  fact  cannot  be  denied, 
and  it  is  nowhere  denied,  in  practice,  however  much 
it  may  be  in  theory — that  what  men  regard  as  the 
Church,  is  acknowledged  to  have  authority  over  its 
members  in  matters  of  faith.  No  member  is  allowed 
to  contradict  anything  that  is  held  to  be  fundamental 
by  any  religious  society  or  church,  and  yet  retain  his 
membership.  The  right  of  discipline  and  excommuni- 
cation is  claimed  and  exercised  by  all. 

Now  in  the  Church  this  right  becomes  one  of  fear- 
ful responsibility  and  import,  for  it  declares  the  ex- 
cluded member  to  have  denied  the  Faith,  whereof 
alone  cometh  salvation — it  cuts  him  off  from  the 
means  of  grace,  the  fellowship  of  Christ,  and  unless 
he  repents  and  is  restored,  from  the  hope  of  salvation. 
And  it  is  as  sure  as  the  Revealed  Word  of  Grod  itself, 
that  what  is  thus  done  on  earth  will  be  ratified  in 
heaven,  unless  the  Church  in  so  doing  has  exceeded 
her  authority,  and  made  that  to  be  a  term  or  condi- 
tion of  communion,  which  is  not  clearly  laid  down  in 
the  Scriptures  as  of  essential  and  fundamental  impor- 
tance. 

Hence  the  Church,  as  a  whole,  comes  to  us,  and 
each  branch  respectively,  should  come  to  each  indi- 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF   SECTARIANISM.  383 

vidual  in  its  portion  of  the  earth's  inhabitants,  with 
the  Scriptures  as  the  Word  of  God  and  the  Revelation 
of  His  Will :  and  with  its  Creed  or  catechism  contain- 
ing a  brief  summary  statement  of  what  the  Scripture 
teaches  that  he  ought  to  believe  and  do,  with  fuller 
explanations  of  the  same  truths,  in  her  Canons,  her 
Liturgies,  her  Offices,  and  in  the  Homilies  and  Ser- 
mons of  her  Preachers.  And  this  each  one  is  au- 
thorized and  bound  to  receive  as  the  true  meaning  and 
intent  of  the  Scriptures,  until  he  is  qualified  to  look 
beyond  these  elementary  forms  and  teachings  to  the 
Bible  itself,  and  to  the  teachings  of  the  Catholic 
Church  while  it  was  undivided,  and  all  of  its  different 
branches  spake  and  taught  the  same  thing.  And  if 
his  branch  of  the  Church  brings  him  no  other  Creed 
than  that  of  the  Apostles,  or  that  which  was  agreed 
in  by  the  whole  Church,  and  no  teaching  but  what  is 
in  accordance  with  that  Creed,  and  the  teaching  of  the 
Church  in  its  earliest  days,  I  confess  I  cannot  see 
how  the  guilt  or  the  danger  of  him  who  rejects  any 
fundamental  portion  of  that  teaching,  can  be  less  than 
that  of  him  who  rejects  a  certain  portion  of  the  Word 
of  God,  because  it  teaches  what  he  thinks  ought  not 
to  be  found  there,  and  could  not  if  it  came  from  God. 

Now  1  say  only  that  it  was  manifestly  the  design 
of  the  Church  that  it  should  be  such  a  teacher,  such  a 
M  Pillar  ami  ( i  round  of  the  truth"  to  men. 

$  L3.  lint  mi  seot,  QO other  Church  than  No  ■*• 
thai  which  Christ  founded,  can  perform  this  f„ri„  n.'w runo- 
function.      No  other  can  have  the   like  seen-  ''""    "f    ll,° 

Church. 

lit}   to  the    identity  and    Lr«'iiuinene88  of   the 
Scriptures.      No  other  could    have  had  the  right  inter- 


384  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

pretation  of  the  Scriptures,  for  then  they  would  not 
have  left  the  Church  ;  and  no  other,  therefore,  can  bring 
to  us  the  message  which  Christ  would  have  us  receive, 
or  has  any  authority  to  pretend  to  do  it.  Here  is  a 
function  which  it  is  necessary  for  man  that  something 
should  perform  for  him.  It  is  a  function  that  can  be 
performed  by  no  other  society  than  that  which  our 
Lord  and  His  Apostles  founded,  and  it  is  clear  from 
the  Scriptures  that  the  Church  was  designed  to  per- 
form that  function. 

In  what  I  have  said  on  this  subject,  I  have  not 
been  considering  or  setting  forth  the  authority  which 
the  Church  may  have  to  bind  all  her  members  to  the 
reception  of  her  interpretations  of  Christianity  ;  but 
rather    the    security   which    she    was    designed    to 

AFFORD,  THAT  WE  HAVE  THE  SCRIPTURES  AS  THEY  CAME 
FROM  THE  PEN  OF  THOSE  WHO  WROTE  AS  THEY  WERE 
MOVED  BY  THE  HoLY  GrHOST,  AND  THE  TRUE  SENSE  OF 
THExM,    OR    THE    TRUTH    AS    IT    IS    IN    JeSUS. 

h  14.  Let  us  now  pass  to  the  consideration  ol 
another  element  of  the  moral  design  of  the  Church  as 
connected  with  its  identity. 

The  church         The  Church  itself,  through  its  Ministry 
iesigned  to  be  an^  Sacraments,  was  designed  to  be  a  chan- 

a    channel  of  »  a 

grace.  nel  or  means  of  grace. 

In  discussing  this  subject,  so  far  as  our  present 
purpose  is  concerned,  I  shall  not  need  to  enter  much 
upon  points  that  are  purely  theological,  and  I  design 
to  do  so  as  little  as  possible. 

It  is  evident  from  the  records,  and  admitted,  I  be- 
lieve, on  all  hands,  that  the  Church  was  to  be  gath- 
ered, and  extended,  and  perpetuated  by  the  Preaching 


X.J  EFFECTS   OF    SECTARIANISM.  385 

of  the  Word,  and  the  Baptism  of  those  who  should  be 
prepared  for  membership.  Baptism  was  to  be  the 
dividing  line — the  distinguishing  mark,  between  those 
who  had  been  admitted  as  members  of  the  Church, 
and  those  who  had  not.  If,  now,  Baptism  is  a  means 
of  grace,  and  designed  to  convey  spiritual  blessings, 
then  those  blessings  depend  upon,  and  flow  from  the 
identity  of  the  Church.  They  imply  its  identity,  be- 
cause the  blessings  of  Baptism  as  a  Sacrament,  be 
they  what  they  may,  were  promised  to  that  Baptism, 
and  that  only  which  was  to  be  administered  to  those 
about  to  be  admitted,  and  who  were  thereby  admitted 
to  His  Church. 

I  put  the  statement  into  this  form  on  purpose  to 
avoid  the  question  of  the  validity  of  lay  Baptism.  I 
do  not  design  to  affirm  or  assume  that  ministerial 
authority  is  essential  to  Baptism.  But  I  alfirm  as  a 
part  of  my  argument,  that  whatever  is  said  0nIy  tho 
in  the  Soriptures  of  Baptism  at  all,  is  said  B»ipt'»mofthe 

i  t-»  i-i  i       •     •  Churcli  spoken 

of  that  Baptism  winch  was  to  be  administered,,!!,,  the  Scrip- 
for  the  purpose  of  joining  members  to  thelures" 
Church.  No  other  is  spoken  of,  or,  so  far  as  we 
oan  see,  thought  of,  when  Baptism  as  an  institution  to 
be  observed  and  administered  by  the  disciples  of 
Christ,  was  the  subject  <>f  remark.  The  Scriptures 
were  not  speaking  of  what  might  be  done  by  others, 
or  <>f  the  form  of  Christian  rites  that  might  be  used 
for  other  purposes  than  thai  forwhiohil  was  originally 
designed.     If.  therefore,  persons  design  to  institutes 

new   church,  and    borrow    their   rites   and  cm •monies, 

and  even  their  doctrines   and    form   of  organization 

from    the    Script  ure.*.,     we    cannot,    attribute  to  these 
17 


386  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

things  the  same  spiritual  efficacy  as  when 
ty  of  Baptism  they  are  used  for  the  purpose  for  which 
depends  upon  they  were  originally  designed.     To  say  that 

the  identity  of  J  °  J  °  J 

the  purpose  the  outward  form  of  Baptism,  when  used 
uTe(TiCh " iS  to  admit  members  into  the  Presbyterian 
church,  the  Methodist  church,  or  any  other 
"  voluntary  association  of  men  for  religious  purposes," 
is  attended  by  the  same  spiritual  results,  as  when  it 
is  used  to  admit  members  into  the  Church  of  Christ 
for  which  it  was  designed,  is  to  commit  the  same 
logical  error  as  would  be  committed  by  applying  what 
the  Scriptures  say  of  the  house  and  worship  of  that 
God  who  is  over  all,  blessed  for  ever,  to  any  of  the 
idols  which  misguided  men  may  have  chosen  to  be 
"  their  god." 

I  am  not  here  offering  the  Romish  doctrine,  that 
the  intention  of  the  minister  is  essential  to  the  effi- 
cacy of  the  Sacraments.  I  am  not  speaking  of  his 
intention,  or  what  he  may  intend  at  all,  in  reference 
to  particular  cases,  as  does  the  Romish  dogma.  Their 
doctrine  is,  that  unless  the  Priest  designs  to  convey 
the  efficacy  of  the  Sacrament,  no  effect  is  produced. 
But  I  am  speaking  of  the  totally  different  case  of  the 
use  of  Baptism,  to  admit  members  into  other  churches 
than  that  which  our  Lord  founded.  And  I  say,  that 
to  expect  the  efficacy  of  His  Baptism  to  follow  in 
such  cases,  is  as  absurd  as  to  expect  the  blessings  that 
follow  from  a  sincere  worship  to  the  true  Grod,  will  be 
bestowed  upon  one  who  pays  the  same  worship  at 
the  shrine  of  some  idol  of  his  own  choosing. 

§  15.  With  these    remarks    we  will    pass    to   a 


X.]  EFFECTS   OF   SECTARIANISM.  387 

consideration  of  what  the  Scriptures  say  of  The  design 
the  design  and  efficacy  of  Christian  Bap- ^s®cacy  of 
tism. 

1.  1.  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be 
saved."1 

2.  "  Go  ye,  therefore,  teach  all  nations,  baptizing 
them,  &c."2 

From  these  texts  I  infer  simply  that  Baptism  is  a 
positive  institution,  which  all  are  commanded  to 
observe  as  the  first  step  of  their  discipleship. 

II.  1.  "Repent  and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you, 
in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission  of 
sins."  3 

2.  "  Arise,  and  be  baptized,  and  wash  away  thy 
sins." 4 

3.  "  Christ  also  loved  the  Church  and  gave  Him- 
self for  it ;  that  He  might  sanctify  and  cleanse  it 
with  the  washing  of  water,  by  the  word."  5 

Taking  these  passages  together,  they  prove  two 
things  concerning  Baptism.  1.  That  it  sanctifies, 
that  is,  sets  apart  from  the  world  and  consecrates  to 
God,  (for  I  am  not  disposed  to  put  any  higher  sense 
on  the  word  as  used  here,  and  there  is  no  lower  one 
to  be  used,)  and  2.  That  it  washes  away  sins.  The 
expressions  are  "  for  the  remission  of  sins ,"  "wash 
away  thji  situ"  and  "  cleanse"  all  implying  the  same 
result,  the  cleansing  the  soul  from  the  stain  and  guilt 
of  sin. 

III.  1.  "Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  thee,  except  a 

>  Murk  xvi.  16.  -  M;itl.  xxviii    19.  3  Acts  li.  38. 

4  Acts  xxii.  16.  6  Bpfa,  v.  2o,  26. 


388  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

man  be   bom  of  water  and    the   spirit f   he  cannot 
enter  the  kingdom  of  Grod."2 

2.  "  According  to  His  mercy  He  saved  us,  by  the 
washing'  of  regeneration,  and  renewing  of  the  Holy 
Ghosts 

3.  "  Eight  souls  were  saved  by  water,  the  like 
figure  whereunto  even  Baptism  doth  also  now  save 
us.  ....  .  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ."  4 

From  these  passages  we  can  infer  no  less  than 
that  in  Baptism  we  "  are  born  again"  receive  "the 
washing  of  regeneration"  and  are  put  into  a  state  of 
salvation.  By  "  doth  now  save  us,"  I  think  we  can 
understand  no  less  than  to  put  into  a  state  of  salvation, 
and  I  certainly  would  not  cite  it  as  proving  anything 
more. 

IV.  1.  "So  many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into 
Jesus   Christ,  were  baptized  into  His  death."  5 

2.  "  For  as  many  of  you  as  have  been  baptized 
into  Christ  have  pat  on  Christ."  6 

I  shall  not  undertake  to  develop  the  full  meaning 
of  these  expressions,  "  baptized  into  Christ."  I  shall 
rather  pass  them  with  the  remark  that  they  must  be 
understood  to  indicate  some  dose  and  intimate  union 
with  Christ  to  be  effected  by  Baptism.  Perhaps  their 
meaning  is  only  more  fully  explained  by  the  following 
passage  from  Colossians.' 

"  And  ye  are  complete  in  Him,  which  is  the  head 
of  all  principality  and  power  ;    in  whom  also  ye  are 

1  The  "  of"  in  our  version  in  this  place  is  inserted  without  anything 
in  the  original  to  require  it, 

2  John  iii.  5.  3  Titus  hi.  5.  4  1  Pet.  iii.  20,  21. 
*  Rom.  vL  3.                    6  GaL  iii.  27.  7  Col.  ii.  10-12. 


X]  EFFECTS    OF  SECTARIANISM.  389 

circumcised  with  the  circumcision  made  without 
hands,  in  putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh 
by  the  circumcision  of  Christ;  buried  with  him  in 
Baptism,  wherein  also  (that  is  in  Baptism)  ye  are 
risen  with  Him  through  the  faith  of  the  operation  of 
God,  who  hath  raised  Him  from  the  dead." 

Now  in  this  passage,  obscure  as  it  is  in  many  re- 
spects, it  is  manifest  that  the  baptized  Colossians, 
"  the  saints  and  faithful  brethren  in  Christ  which 
are  at  Colosse,"  though  uncircumcised  in  the  flesh, 
had  obtained  "through  the  faith"  all  that  circum- 
cision effected  or  prefigured — the  "  putting  off  the  body 
of  the  sins  of  the  flesh,"  and  moreover,  a  hope  in  the 
resurrection,  ("  ye  are  risen,"  is  the  expression,)  by  the 
circumcision  and  the  Resurrection. of  Christ,  in  con- 
sequence  of  their  having-  been  "  baptized  into  Him." 

It  is  impossible  to  say  that  the  Sacrament  of  Bap- 
tism is  not  the  thing  here  intended,  for  the  water 
itself  and  its  use,  are  spoken  of,  in  terminis,  as  the 
very  things  by  which  the  result  is  accomplished — 
"  sanctify  and  cleanse  with  the  washing  of  water," — 
"  the  washing  of  regeneration" — "  saved  by  water,  the 
like  figure  whereunto  even  Baptism  doth  now  save 
08  " — «  born  of  the  water  and  the  Spirit." 

As  I  have  already  said,  I  do  not  design  to  enter 
into  particulars  or  theological  distinctions  and  qualifi- 
cations, 1  cite  these  passers  only  for  the  purpose  of 
proving  thai  some  very  great  and  very  important 
spiritual  effeol  is  dependent  upon  the  Baptism  which 
our  Lord  instituted  as  the  Saoramenl  of  initiation  to 
His  church:  and  thai  whatever  that  effect  may  he, 
it  is  dependent  upon  the  identity  of  the  Baptism  ad- 


390  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

ministered  with  that  which  was  instituted  by  our 
Lord,  and  of  which  these  things  are  said  in  the  Scrip- 
tures. And  the  identity  of  that  Baptism,  as  I  have 
shown,  depends  upon  the  identity  of  its  design,  as  well 
as  upon  the  identity  of  outward  form  ;  and  finally, 
the  identity  of  design  implies  the  identity  of  the 
Church. 

The  Eucha-  ^  ^'  Substantially  the  same  things  may 
rist  bears  a  be  said  of  the  other  Sacrament,  the  Lord's 
the  moral  de-  Supper,  in  its  relation  to  the  identity  of  the 
sign    of  the  Church.      Its   observance   was   commanded 

Church. 

to  the  members  of  His  Church,  and  its 
whole  efficacy  must  depend  upon  its  being  in  His 
Church.  If  some  one  should  undertake  to  use  it  in 
connection  with  Mahometanism,  with  the  Platonic 
Philosophy,  or  with  a  refined  Pantheism,  which  re- 
gards Christianity  as  only  one  of  many  original  reve- 
lations of  the  Infinite  in  the  finite,  nobody  would  be 
so  absurd  and  senseless  as  to  suppose  that  it  would  be 
attended  with  the  same  blessed  spiritual  effects  that 
are  promised  to  it  in  the  Church. 
„,    ,  .  §  17.  Let  us  look  at  these  effects. 

The  design 

of  the  Lord's       I.  "  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  Me."  l 
uPPer-  From  this  we  infer  that  the  observance 

of  this  Sacrament  in  the   Church   is  a   commanded 
duty. 

II.  "  For  as  often  as  ye  eat  this  bread,  and  drink 
this  cup,  ye  do  shew  the  Lord's  death  till l  He  come.' " 3 

The  effect  of  the  observance  of  the  Sacrament  here 
spoken  of,  is  perhaps  exerted   upon  the  world  of  un- 

.uke  xxii.  19:1  Cor.  xi.  24.  ,J  1  Cor.  xL  26. 


X.]  EFFECTS   OF   SECTARIANISM.  391 

believers,  rather  than  upon  those  engaged  in  its  ob- 
servance themselves. 

III.  "  The  cup  of  blessing  which  we  bless,  is  it 
not  the  communion  of  the  Blood  of  Christ  ?  The 
bread  which  we  break,  is  it  not  the  communion  of  the 
Body  of  Christ  ?  "  ! 

The  word  here  translated  "  communion,"  koivuvix, 
sometimes  means  communication,  or  that  which  com- 
municates. Such,  I  apprehend,  must  be  its  significa- 
tion in  the  passage  before  us.  For  communion,  in 
the  proper  sense  of  the  word,  implies  two  living  con- 
scious personal  agents,  between  whom  the  commu- 
nion, fellowship  or  intercourse  takes  place.  But  in 
this  case  the  Koivau'ct,  is  between  believers  on  the  one 
part,  and  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ — not  Christ 
Himself — on  the  other,  which  is  not  a  conscious  per- 
sonal agent,  and  therefore  the  Koivaua.  must  be  a  com- 
munication or  impartation  of  the  Body  or  Blood  of 
Christ  to  the  worthy  recipients. 

I  shall  not  undertake  to  analyze  this,  which  is 
manifestly  figurative  language,  and  to  say  precise- 
ly what  it  does  mean,  in  plain  didactic  terms.  For 
our  present  purpose  it  is  sufficient  to  leave  it  as  we 
iind  it,  and  say,  that  in  any  reasonable  view  of  it,  it 
must  imply  the  impartation  of  some  great  spiritual 
benefit  to  those  who  worthily  receive  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per. 

The  passages  already  extracted  refer  to  the  Lord's 
Supper  so  unambiguously,  that  there  has  never  been 
any  diversity  of  opinion,  so    far  as  I  know,  as  to  their 

1 1  Cor.  x.  16. 


392  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

application.  The  next  passage  that  I  quote  has  not 
been  so  universally  applied  to  the  Lord's  Supper.  I 
shall,  however,  quote  it,  as  believing  that  it  was  in- 
tended to  refer  to  that  subject. 

IV.  "  And  Jesus  said  unto  them,  I  am  the  Bread 
of  life  :  I  am  the  Living  Bread  which  came  down 
from  heaven :  if  any  man  eat  this  Bread  he  shall  live 
for  ever  :  and  the  Bread  which  I  will  give  is  My  flesh, 
which  I  give  for  the  life  of  the  world.  Except  ye  eat 
the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  Man  and  drink  His  blood,  ye 
have  no  life  in  you.  "Whoso  eateth  My  flesh  and 
drinketh  My  blood  hath  eternal  life  ;  and  I  will  raise 
him  up  at  the  last  day.  He  that  eateth  My  flesh  and 
drinketh  My  blood,  dwelleth  in  Me  and  I  in  him."1 

I  lay  no  special  stress  upon  this  passage  in  this 
place,  not  only  because  of  the  doubt  entertained  with 
regard  to  its  application  to  the  Lord's  Supper  by  some 
persons,  but  chiefly  because,  if  it  does  refer  to  that 
Sacrament,  it  does  not  in  my  estimation  imply  any- 
thing more  than  is  implied  in  the  passage  just  quoted 
from  Corinthians,  which  does  unquestionably  refer  to 
the  reception  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 

It  is  therefore  undeniable  that  this  Sacrament  is 
the  medium  or  channel  of  important  spiritual  graces 
and  influences.  And  these  graces  and  influences  are 
spoken  of  as  depending  upon  the  reception  of  the  out- 
ward elements  of  bread  and  wine. 

§  18.  But  when  the  Scriptures  are  speaking  of 
these  beneficial  results  of  the  right  reception  of  these 
visible  symbols,  they  are  speaking    of    their    admin- 

1  John  vi  35-56. 


XJ  EFFECTS    OF   SECTARIANISM.  393 

istration  to  the  members  of  the  Church  and 


The    bene- 


within  its  pale.    No  other  use  of  these  em-fits  of  the 

Lord's  Supper 

blems  or  symbols  is  spoken  of,  or  appears  to  can  be 


receiv- 


have  entered  the  thoughts  of  the  inspired  wri-  *J  on'y  iu  tbe 

°  r  Church. 

ters,  or  of  our  Lord  Himself.  This,  then,  is 
the  implied  condition  of  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacra- 
ment,— its  administration  and  reception  in  the  Church ; 
and  its  administration  and  reception  in  the  Church 
imply  the  identity  of  the  Church.  It  is  true  that  there 
is  no  express  declaration  that  it  shall  be  without  effi- 
*  cacy  if  it  is  administered  out  of  the  Church.  But  that 
is  not  necessary.  Its  blessings  are  a  special  gift  and 
grant ;  and  in  the  making  of  such  gifts  and  grants  it 
is  necessary  that  the  persons  for  whom  they  are  made 
should  be  named  or  indicated.  But  it  is  not  necessary 
to  name  or  indicate  all  others  to  whom  they  are  not 
made,  except  so  far  as  that  is  done  by  naming  or  in- 
dicating those  to  whom  they  are  made.  If  I  make  a 
donation  to  half  a  dozen  persons  indicated  by  myself, 
it  is  not  necessary  that  I  say  that  I  do  not  do  the  same 
for  others  not  named.  That  follows  of  course.  So  with 
our  Saviour's  promises.  When  He  says  He  will  give 
to  certain  persons  a  blessing,  or  will  give  it  on  certain 
conditions,  wo  have  no  right  to  infer,  and  it  would  be 
most  hazardous  to  infer  that  tie  will  give  it  to  any 
others,  or  on  any  other  condition. 

$    19.    J  will    (dose    this    part    of  my  BUD- 

1  J  rorgiyeoeM 

jeoi    with   the   consideration    of  one   more  «f  rim  tn  um 

text  r,m,ch- 

Eight   days  after  the  Resurrection  our  Lord  ap- 

peared  to  His  Apostles  and  said  unto  them: — 

"Whosesoever  sins   \e  remit   thev  are  remitted 
17* 


394  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

linto  them ;  and  whose  soever  sins  ye  retain  they  are 
retained."  l 

I  do  not  design  to  enter  upon  any  inquiry  into  the 
powers  of  Absolution  here  conferred  upon  the  Apos- 
tles. I  am  not  disposed  to  understand  the  words  as 
implying  any  judicial  power  of  that  kind.  For  all 
present  purposes  we  need  not  suppose  that  the  words 
convey  anything  more  than  the  authority  to  preach 
that  gospel  which  bringeth  salvation,  and  for  the  ad- 
ministration of  those  sacraments  which  are  so  impor- 
tant a  part  of  the  means  of  salvation  as  we  have  just- 
shown  them  to  be. 

The  question  for  us  is,  to  whom  does  this  apply, 
or  how  far  does  its  meaning  extend. 

If  we  recur  to  the  context  we  shall  see,  that  in 
all  probability,  St.  Thomas  was  not  present  when  these 
words  were  addressed  to  the  other  ten.  St.  Matthias 
and  St.  Paul  were  not  Apostles  then,  and  of  course 
were  no  part  of  those  to  whom  the  words  were  ad- 
dressed. 

We  must  therefore  extend  the  application  of  their 
meaning  to  persons  who  were  not  then  present ;  for  St. 
Paul  was  not  one  whit  behind  the  very  chiefest  of  the 
Apostles. 

I  apprehend  that  it  was  designed  for  all  the  Minis- 
try of  the  Church — all  whomsoever  Christ  shall  send 
to  preach  the  Crospel  and  administer  the  Sacraments. 
And  this  I  infer,  not  only  from  the  nature  of  the  ap- 
parent meaning  of  the  text  itself,  but  also  from  the 
inference  that  will  immediately  follow  from  a  restric- 

1  John  xx.  23. 


X]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  395 

tion  of  it  within  any  narrower  limits.  The  grant  of 
authority  is  both  inclusive  and  exclusive.  It  confers 
remission  on  those  on  whom  they  confer  it,  and  with- 
holds it  from  those  from  whom  they  withhold  it.  But 
it  makes  no  provision  for  others,  nor  for  forgiveness 
beyond  the  limits  of  their  ministrations,  or  after  they 
should  be  dead,  or  as  a  class,  cease  to  exist.  If  then 
the  commission  or  authority  does  not  extend  to  the 

hi 

whole  Ministry  of  the  Church  to  the  end  of  the  world, 
then  the  time  either  has  come  or  may  come  when  the 
grant  will  cease  and  be  inoperative.  In  that  case  the 
promise  of  forgiveness  is  at  an  end,  which  of  course 
is  an  event  that  will  not  occur  until  the  end  of  the 
world  and  the  second  advent. 

It  is  true  that  this  adds  but  very  little,  if  any- 
thing, to  what  we  have  deduced  from  the  other  con- 
siderations just  referred  to.  But  it  Connects  Thispower 
the  promise  of  forgiveness  most  intimately  [Jj^'^jjj 
with  the  identity  of  the  Church.  It  promises  church. 
forgiveness  to  those  that  shall  receive  it  at  the  hands 
of  those  whom  I  have  here  supposed  to  be  the  whole 
Ministry  of  the  Churoh.  Bui  there  it  stops — there  is 
do  promise  beyond  or  further  than  that. 

Now  these  items  show  most  conclusively  that  there 
1-  an  important  moral  design  in  the  Church  in  relation 
to  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  the  renovation  and  sal- 
vation of  souls.  It  is  the  channel  of  those  blessings 
which  G-od  has  promised  to  confer  upon  mankind. 

k    20.    It   eauiiiil   laiil\    In-  said  hv  wav  of        Theie  eon, 

derogating  from  the  importance  oi  these  „„„,„  ,,„  ,„„ 
elements  of  the  mural  design  of  the  Church,  *•»»•»*•  *°m 
that  all  these  blessings  are  elsewhere  pro-  unnnnffiitti 


396  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

mised,    with   no    mention    of    such   conditions,    but 
simply  on  the  ground  of  faith. 

To  this  I  reply  in  the  first  place,  that  faith  on  the 
part  of  the  recipients  is  the  essential  condition  of  the 
blessings  which  are  said  to  be  conferred  or  bestowed 
in  the  Sacraments.  The  only  exception  is  perhaps, 
that  of  baptism  of  infants.  But  secondly,  and  chiefly ; 
the  conditions  on  which  Grod  has  promised  His  bless- 
ings can  never  be  inconsistent  with  one  another.  And 
if  He  sometimes  speaks  of  one  where  no  mention  is 
made  of  the  rest,  we  are  by  no  means  to  infer  that 
they  are  not  important  or  essential.  We  are  to  collect 
all  the  conditions  that  He  has  anywhere  prescribed, 
acknowledging  each  to  be  as  important  as  He  Himself 
has  represented  it  to  be,  and  we  shall  then  doubtless 
find  that  they  all  harmonize  and  easily  fall  into  their 
appropriate  places  in  the  system,  if  we  take  the  right 
view  of  them.  Thus  the  merits  and  atonement  of 
Christ  are  the  only  and  sole  ground  of  human  salva- 
tion :  faith  and  repentance  on  the  part  of  man  is  the 
indispensable  condition  of  his  receiving  the  benefits  of 
that  atonement ;  those  benefits  are  conveyed  to  the 
soul  in  the  Sacraments,  and  we  must  bring  forth  the 
fruits  of  good  works  and  obedience  as  the  condition 
of  our  final  acceptance  at  the  day  of  judgment.  Hence, 
there  is  no  inconsistency  in  speaking  of  any  one  of 
these  conditions  as  alone,  and  by  itself,  necessary  to 
salvation,  as  the  Scriptures  have  done.  The  mistake 
is  when  we  infer  from  this  mode  of  speaking  that  the 
means  or  condition  thus  spoken  of  as  essential,  is  the 
only  one  that  is  to  be  so  regarded.  I  apprehend  that 
we  are  not  authorized  to  institute  or  draw  any  com- 


X]  EFFECTS   OF    SECTARIANISM.  3g7 

parison  that  designs  to  form  a  rule  of  belief  or  practice, 
between  these  several  conditions.  The  disposition  to 
disregard  or  omit  anything  in  the  divine  law  because 
we  have  concluded  that  it  is  not  essential,  is  one  of  the 
most  alarming  and  dangerous  that  man  can  well  ex- 
hibit. 

I  think  we  may  therefore  say,  that  the  Church 
was  designed  to  be  the  chief  agent  in  bringing  to 
mankind  "  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,"  and  that  in  its 
Sacraments  and  Ministry  are  the  ordinary  channels  of 
forgiving  and  renewing  grace. 

But  this  is  not  all  that  man  needs ;  nor  all  of  the 
moral  result  that  the  Church  was  designed  to  accom- 
plish. 

$  21.  In  looking  at  mankind  at  large,  Disobedience 
the  first  and  most  obvious  fact,  in  a  moral  cfharacteli8lic 

of  man. 

point  of  view  that  strikes  the  observer,  who 
is  acquainted  with  the  contents  of  the  Scriptures,  is 
that  of  disobedience.  On  examination,  every  sin  is 
found  to  contain  this  as  the  chief  element  of  its  guilt. 
The  evils  which  result,  in  the  ordinary  course  of  con- 
sequences, great  as  they  sometimes  are,  are  nothing 
compared  with  the  fad  that  the  authority  of  the 
Supreme  (Governor,  upon  Whom  all  things  depend, 
and  for  all  things,  is  rejected,  despised,  and  trampled 
under  foot.  A  shock  is  thus  sent  throughout  the 
universe — the  « •  1 1  •  •  < •  i  is  felt  by  every  created  thing. 

If  we  recur  to  the  first  sin  committed  on  earth, 
the  transgression  in  Eden,  we  shall  see  that  its  whole 
L'uilt  oonsistad  apparently  in  its  being  an  aol  of  dis- 
obedience. So  far  as  we  know  ot  can  see  it  had  no 
natural  consequences  of  evil.     Bu1  it  was  the  axalta- 


398  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

tion  of  human  pride,  the  aspiration  of  human  ambi- 
tion, the  disposition  to  trust  in  human  reason,  to  the 
disparagement  of  the  revealed  will  or  imposed  com- 
mandments of  Grod. 

$  22.  And  if  we  look  at  the  dispensations  of  God 
to  man,  we  shall  derive  a  lesson  of  equal  importance 
in  relation  to  our  present  subject.  We  have  alluded 
to  this  part  of  (rod's  dealing  with  man  in  a  previous 
chapter,1  and  shall  not  need  to  repeat  here  what  was 
said  there.  From  these  considerations  it  is  evident 
Theresto-  mat  obedience  is  the  cardinal  point  of  our 
ration  of  obe-  earthly  probation,  as  including  all  the  rest. 

dience  a  moral  .  . 

design  of  the  Each  of  the  prominent  relations  in  life  has 
its  precept  of  obedience.  Children  are  com- 
manded to  obey  their  parents,  servants  their  masters, 
wives  their  husbands,  citizens  and  subjects  their 
rulers  and  governors,  and  Christians  their  pastors. 
Thus  the  law  of  obedience  is  made  to  run  through 
all  the  gradations  of  society.  And  from  the  highest 
Archangel  around  the  Eternal  Throne,  through  each 
descending  link  in  the  scale  of  being,  Angel,  Seraphim, 
Cherubim,  Apostles,  Prophets,  Bishops,  Priests,  and 
Deacons,  down  to  the  humblest  individual  that  waits 
at  the  altar,  or  serves  as  a  doorkeeper  in  the  House 
of  the  Lord,  there  must  be  order  and  subordination  ; 
and  the  duty  of  obedience  from  each  one  to  those  that 
are  over  him  in  the  scale  of  the  Divine  appointments, 
is  essential  to  the  stability  and  harmony  of  the  whole. 
§  23.     Now  this  obedience  implies  £ov- 

Obedience  *  ° 

implies    gov-  ernment  and  governors   in    the    immediate 
exercise  of  authority  over  us. 

i  Chap.  IL 


ernors. 


X]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  399 

The  Scriptures,  unaccompanied  by  any  interpreta- 
tion, or  interpreted  by  each  individual's  private  judg- 
ment, cannot  accomplish  the  result.  For  in  the  first 
place,  but  only  a  very  small  part  of  the  human  race 
are  able,  or  ever  have  been  able  to  read  and  acquire 
sufficient  familarity  with  the  contents  of  the  Scrip- 
tures to  be  able  to  know  what  they  teach  and  require. 
The  mass  of  Christians  in  the  world  cannot  read  at 
all.  And  a  still  greater  number  have  no  sufficient 
amount  of  leisure  to  make  themselves  familiar  with 
all  that  is  contained  in  the  Holy  Bible.  # 

$  24.  But  again,  the  endless  diversities  in  the 
religious  opinions  that  prevail  in  the  community,  show 
beyond  question  that  without  something  having  au- 
thority to  intervene  between  the  Scriptures  and  the 
private  judgment  of  the  individual,  there  is  no  possi- 
bility of  bringing  men  into  obedience  to  any  0bedi 
one    uniform   rule,    such   as    that   which   is  hnpita  some 

,  ,        0      .  ,  .  objective  rule 

contained  in  the  fecriptures  must  be,  unless  0f  interpret* 
they  i,rive  an  uncertain  sound  and  contradict llon" 
themselves.  The  diversities  do  not  a  fleet  mere  doc- 
trines alone,  but  they  ;tllect  the  practice  of  our  religion 
also;  and  the  practices  which  are  alleged  to  have 
been  derived  from  the  Word  of  God,  are  as  diverse 
ms  the  doctrines  themselves.  Some  baptize  their  chil- 
dren :   others  consider  it  popery  to  do  so.     Some  think 

the  frequent  obaervan< t"  the  Holy  Communion  Lr«>«>d 

and  edifying;  and  others  pronounce  it  ;i  mere  super- 
stition and  formality.  Some  believe  thai  the  restitu- 
tion of  what  has  been  wrongfully  taken  is  necessary 
to  the  obtaining  G-od's  favor  when  one  repents;  others 
hardly  ever  think  of  the  thing.      Some  believe  thai  tho 


400  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

tithe,  at  least,  of  their  income  is  God's  due  for  the 
support  of  His  religion  ;  others  are  thankful  that  they 
can  enjoy  all  the  advantages  of  religion  and  have  it 
cost  them  nothing.  Some  think  that  a  dailv  service  is 
edifying  and  no  more  than  is  due  to  the  mercy  and 
goodness  of  God  ;  others  think  that  once  in  a  week  is 
often  enough  to  spend  their  time  in  the  public  wor- 
ship of  God. 

Now  all  these  views  cannot  be  right,  They  can- 
not all  be  inculcated  in  the  Word  of  God  or  derived 
from  it.  And  most  undeniably  it  is  best  for  each 
individual  to  know  what  is  the  view  that  is  presented 
in  the  Scriptures,  and  to  follow  it. 

$  25.  But  again,  the  idea  that  men  may 

Obedience  ° 

connected  with  violate  the  unity  of  the  Church,  separate 
the  church.  °ffrom  its  communion,  and  form  a  church  of 
their  own  for  every  opinion  which  they  may 
honestly  and  conscientiously  hold,  is  a  death-blow  to 
all  obedience. 

If  man  were  not  depraved  and  corrupt  in  his  nature, 
it  is  most  certain  that  he  could  not  honestly  and  sin- 
cerely entertain  any  view  or  opinion  that  is  not  in 
harmony  with  the  truth.  But  it  is  one  of  the  proofs, 
as  well  as  one  of  the  worst  evils  of  our  fallen  condi- 
tion, that  we  do  sometimes  love  error  rather  than 
truth,  and  can  most  honestly  and  most  conscientiously 
believe  that  which  is  not  true  and  righteous. 

No  fact  is  more  certain,  or  of  a  more  fundamental 
importance,  than  that  we  need  something  to  go  be- 
hind even  our  convictions  of  right  and  truth,  and  bring 
these  very  convictions  into  harmony  with  that  which 
is  really  the  right  and  the  truth.    Undoubtedly  "  there 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  401 

is  a  way  that  seemeth  right  unto  a  man,  but  the  end 
thereof  are  the  ways  of  death."  '  We  are  not  for  a  mo- 
ment to  suppose  that  all  those  who  are  wandering  in 
the  ways  of  error  and  unrighteousness  are  conscious 
of  insincerity  and  hypocrisy.  It  is  difficult  to  say 
whether  such  an  opinion  would  imply  most  of  unchar- 
itable ness,  or  of  a  total  ignorance  of  human  nature. 
No,  those  who  are  in  error  often  give  the  most  evi- 
dence of  sincerity  and  good  intentions.  The  Prophet 
speaks  of  the  idolater  thus  :  "  a  deceived  heart  hath 
turned  him  aside,  that  he  cannot  deliver  his  soul  nor 
say,  'is  there  not  a  lie  in  my  right  hand  ?  '  "3  Surely 
he  has  not  duly  estimated  the  fearful  import  and  con- 
sequences of  the  fall  of  man,  who  has  not  seen  that  it 
has  so  deranged  his  moral  and  spiritual  faculties,  as 
to  make  necessary  some  guide  and  authority  out  of 
himself,  to  reduce  great  truths  to  definite  and  positive 
statements,  Lrreat  principles  to  practical  precepts,  and 
-peak  with  dogmatic  and  commanding  authority. 
We  see  the  oecessity  for  this  in  the  education  and 
government  of  children.  We  see  it  in  schools.  We 
see  it  in  our  legislatures,  and  in  our  courts  of  civil 
as  well  as  criminal  judicature. 

$  26.  If  now  man  may  throw  off  the  re-      n,   ,. 
Lrinien  or  government  that  God  has   placed  impiiestho 
over  mm.  whenever  he  conscientiously  diners  meotofambo- 

from  it,  there  w  an  end  to  all  government  r,ty- 

and  to    all    Obedience]    that   is    not  obedience    properly 

speaking,  which  conforms,  because  the  thing  required 
coincides  with  the  private  judgmenl  of  him  who  is  to 

1  Prov.  xiv.  Li.  ;  I -u.  xhv.  20. 


402  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

do  it.  It  is  only  when  private  judgment  is  yielded  up 
to  an  authority  duly  placed  over  us,  that  our  act  be- 
comes one  of  obedience,  and  shows  any  measure  of 
subjection  to  the  Divine  Will.  To  give  alms  to  a 
poor  person,  because  his  distress  excites  our  compas- 
sion, may  be  indeed  a  commendable  act,  but  no  one 
would  think  of  calling  it  an  act  of  obedience.  It  be- 
comes obedience  only  when  we  do  it  because  Grod  has 
commanded  "  be  ye  merciful  because  I  am  also  mer- 
ciful." 

k  27.  Another  essential  element  of  obedience  is, 
that  it  be  rendered  to  the  proper  authority.  Ultimate- 
ly, it  should  terminate  in  Grod  and  in  His  Truth.  Obe- 
dience to  parents  and  to  civil  magistrates  is  right,  be- 
cause Grod  has  required  it.  But  obedience  to  one  who 
has  usurped  the  authority  which  Grod  has  given  to 
another,  is  rebellion  against  Him.  When  the  people 
desired  a  king  to  rule  over  them  instead  of  the  corrupt 
and  wicked  sons  of  Samuel — who,  nevertheless,  were 
over  them  as  judges,  according  to  the  established  law 
of  Grod,  God  said  unto  Samuel,  "  they  have  not  re- 
jected thee,  but  they  have  rejected  Me  that  I  should 
not  reign  over  them." ' 

The  identi-        Here  then  we  see  the  connection  of  our 
t y   of  the  sub;ect  with  the  identity  of  the  Church.   We 

Church  impli-  J  J 

ed  in  its  de-  have  seen  that  man  needs  an  authority,  and 
mgote°obedT  God  gave  such  an  authority  to  His  Church. 
ence  to  God.  It,  therefore,  is  the  institution  which  He  has 
appointed  for  the  moral  purpose  of  promoting  obedi- 
ence.    We  must  be  brought  into  a  state  of  obedience 

1 1  Sam.  viii.  7. 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  403 

before  we  can  be  admitted  to  the  final  kingdom  and 
glory  of  God.  The  Church  is  the  agent  which  He 
has  appointed  to  accomplish  this  work,  and  the  Bible 
is  the  Rule  which  He  has  given  the  Church  whereby 
to  be  guided  in  doing  it. 

But  if  we  may  reject  this  authority  and  government 
for  every  scruple  of  conscience,  every  conscientious 
opinion,  we  may  at  any  time  escape  the  test  proposed. 
We  are  under  no  obedience  so  long  as  we  may  make  a 
matter  of  conscience  of  any  opinion  we  entertain,  or  of 
any  preference  we  may  cherish,  and  set  up  a  church 
or  authority,  that  shall  direct  and  govern  according 
to  our  own  opinions  and  wishes.  In  that  case,  the 
government  or  church  becomes  but  the  reflection  of 
the  volitions  of  our  own  will. 

$  28.  And  here  is  the  broad  difference  The  church 
between  the  Church  and  all  forms  of  Secta-  p '0,"°T 

obedience :  the 

tarianism.  The  one  represents  unto  us  the  sectsdonot. 
authority  and  will  of  God,  and  the  other  but  reflects 
our  own.  Hence  there  are  as  many  sects  as  there  are 
ola886fl  of  opinion  and  preferences — and  a  form  of  er- 
ror adapted  to  the  weakness  and  peculiar  susceptibili- 
ties of  each  individual,  that  so  he  may  find  something 
that  he  will  like  better,  and  on  the  whole  prefer,  to 
that  which  he  ought,  for  his  soul's  health,  to  receive. 
[fl  imt  this  the  meaning  of  that  saying  of  St  Paul, 
"For  there  must  also  be  heresies  among  you,  Mai 
they  which  are  approved  map  I"  made  manifest  among 
you"  In  our  country  Popery  appeals  to  the  imagi- 
nation, to  the  love  of  pomp  and  show,  and  of  arbitrary 

1  1  Cor.  xi.  19. 


404  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

rule.  Presbyterianism  appeals  to  that  element  which 
has  always  inclined  men  to  fatalism,  and  a  comforta- 
ble conviction  concerning  oneself,  combined  with  a 
belief  that  the  character  and  fate  of  others  was  foreor- 
dained and  cannot  be  helped.  Methodism  appeals  to 
that  species  of  excitement  and  enthusiasm  which  re- 
gards "the  fervor  of  the  animal  sensibilities"1  as  re- 
ligion. And  so  of  all  the  forms  of  error  around  us. 
They  make  the  command  "  deny  thyself,  take  up  thy 
cross  daily,"  to  be  of  none  effect.  They  exhibit  to 
each  individual  some  form  of  religion  which  he  may 
embrace  without  this  painful  and  humiliating  duty. 
If  he  does  not  find  religion  what  he  wants  it,  he  may 
turn  reformer  and  present  it  to  the  world  in  any  form 
that  he  may  choose. 

sectarian-        §  29.  Now  it  is  but  an  insane   folly  to 

prnducVg^n-  suPP0Se  that  such  a  system  can  bring  men 
erai  obedience,  "in  the  unity  of  the  Faith  and  of  the  know- 
ledge of  the  Son  of  God,  unto  a  perfect  man,  unto 
the  measare  of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ." 
No  :  we  need  something  to  meet  us  in  Grod's  name  at 
every  step  and  turn  in  our  lives,  and  with  authority 
to  give  us  His  precepts  and  directions,  until  we  are 
trained  and  habituated  to  that  perfect  resignation  of 
our  own  wills,  that  perfect  humility  and  self-renun- 
ciation, that  perfect  obedience,  which  is  the  dis- 
tinguishing characteristic  of  the  angels  in  heaven,  and 
was  the  crowning  glory  and  charm  in  the  life  and  char- 
acter of  our  blessed  Lord  on  earth. 

Hence  it  is  necessary  to  have  the  representatives 

1 1  use  the  words  of  Bishop  White. 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF   SECTARIANISM.  405 

of  the  Divine  authority  always  present  in  the  form  of 
a  living  and  personal  agent.  And  not  only  so,  but 
even  the  human  infirmities  and  imperfections  of  the 
minister  may  be  turned  to  our  advantage.  The  per- 
fect subjugation  of  every  thought  and  wish  to  the  law 
of  Christ,  can  be  more  surely  and  speedily  effected 
when  the  path  through  which  He  calls  us  to  walk  is 
attended  with  trials  and  hardships  which  it  grieves 
our  unsanctified  natures  to  bear. 

$  30.  But  if  all  this  self-renunciation  and    True  obedi- 

ence  must  be 

voluntary  humiliation  and  submission  be  ren-  rendered  t  o 
dered  to  that  which  we  have  put  in  the  place  thfer  aHuth(;rity 

r  r  of  God  only. 

of  God — some  idol  set  up  in  our  hearts — or 
some  government  which  we  have  erected  in  the  wil- 
fulness of  our  unsubdued  heart,  and  put  into  the 
place  of  that  which  God  has  placed  over  us ;  then  we 
do  indeed  take  up  a  cross,  but  it  is  not  the  cross  of 
Christ;  and  we  make  a  sacrifice,  but  it  is  not  upon  the 
Altar  of  the  true  and  only  God;  and  we  obey,  but 
our  obedience  is  not  rendered  to  Him  whose  right  it 
is  io  reign  on  earth  as  in  heaven. 

$  31.  The  Church,  considered  in  this  The  church 
light,  is  undoubtedly  an  object  of  faith.  It  ™  h#°bj°ct  °f 
i<  bo  regarded  in  all  the  early  Creeds,  and 
in  ;ill  the,  forms  of  them  that  I  remember  to  have 
Been  A.bchdeacoii  Manning,  in  his  invaluable,  little 
work,  "  The  Unity  of  the  Church"  has  collected  the 
testimony  of  the  ancient   Creeds  and  Fathers  to  the. 

antiquity    <>f  this   article    in  all    the    branches    <>f   the 

Church  thai  were  founded  by  the  A.poetles.  He  says, 
as  the  result  of  his  inquiry,     %>  It   is  evident  that  a 

belief   in  the   unity  of  the  Church  forms  an  article  in 


406  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

every  Baptismal  Creed  of  every  Church,  both  in  the 
East  and  in  the  West.  I  am  not  aware  of  any  Bap- 
tismal Creed  extant  in  which  this  article  is  not  to  be 
read."  ' 

"  All  the  early  forms  recite  the  article,"  says  Man- 
ning, "  in  some  one  of  these  three  forms. 

"  1.  '  One  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,'  as  the 
Constantinapolitan  or  Nicene  :  the  Creed  recited  by 
Epiphanius  and  the  Alexandrian,  which  adds,  ^ovjjv, 
'  one  only.' 

"  2.  <  The  Holy  Catholic  Church,'  as  the  Apostles' 
Creed,  the  Spanish,  the  Gallican,  the  forms  in  the 
Roman  Ordinal,  and  the  Apostolical  Constitutions, 
and  one  of  the  Aquillian  Creeds. 

"  3.  '  The  Holy  Church,'  as  the  Roman,  two  of 
the  Aquillian  Creeds,  the  Ancient  Eastern,  the  Creed 
of  Marcellus,  the  Creeds  of  Ravenna,  Turin,  the 
African,  one  of  the  Grail ican,  and  the  Form  in  the 
Sacramentary  of  Grelasius."  2 

The  Archdeacon  was  quoting  these  passages  to 
prove  that  a  belief  in  the  Unity  of  the  Church  was 
considered  an  essential  part  of  the  Christian  Faith  in 
the  Primitive  Church.  The  point  for  which  I  now  refer 
to  them,  is  somewhat  different,  though  not  the  less 
clearly  and  certainly  proved  by  his  authorities — viz  : 
that  "  the  Church  "  was  universally  regarded  as  an 
object  of  Faith. 

And  this  results  from  the  necessity  of  the  case. 

We  have  seen  that  the  identity  of  the  Church, 
that  is,  the  Church  itself,  is  intimately  connected  with 

1  N.  Y.  Ed.,  1844,  p.  23.         2  Manning,  ubi  supra,  pp.  25,  26. 


X.]  EFFECTS   OF   SECTARIANISM.  407 

the  highest  interests  of  man.  We  present  evidence  of 
that  identity.  Our  evidence  is  addressed  to  the  un- 
derstanding and  to  the  conscience  for  the  purpose  of 
inducing  an  exercise  of  belief,  and  leading  us  to  put 
our  trust  in  that  which  we  allege  to  be  the  Church  in 
this  country,  for  all  the  purposes  for  which  the  Church 
itself  was  designed.  • 

It  is  in  this  way  that  every  institution  and  gift  of 
God  comes  to  us.  The  Bible  comes  to  us  in  the  same 
way.  We  take  up  a  book,  and  on  looking  into  its 
contents,  we  find  it  claiming  to  be  a  revelation  from 
God.  We  look  into  its  history.  We  find  from  ex- 
ternal circumstances  that  such  a  revelation  was  once 
made,  and  under  circumstances  similar,  or  precisely 
the  same,  as  those  referred  to  in  the  book  itself.  We 
trace  the  history  of  the  book  then  written,  down  to 
our  own  day,  until  wo  identify  the  copy  in  our  hands 
with  the  original.  We  examine  the  circumstances  of 
its  transmission,  and  find  that  it  cannot  have  been 
ohanged  from  what  it  was  when  first  given.  We 
receive  it  as  the  Word  of  God.  Then  it  is  an  object 
of  Faith — Faith  based  and  exercised  on  testimony. 

Our  Lord  Himself  was  an  object  of  Faith.  He 
had  been  foretold  by  Prophets,  and  was  attended  by 
miraoles.  These  were  the  evidences  of  His  Messiah- 
ship.  Hut  it  was  not  what  is  called  demonstration  in 
the  strictest  sense,  of  the  term.  It  did  not  produce 
irresistible  conviction.  Many  who  had  read  the  Pro- 
phet* ;inil  siw  the  miraoles,  did  not  believe,  hut  con- 
spired to  crucify  linn  as  a  blasphemer  and  a  male- 
factor. 

>o   with   the    Scripture-.      Notwithstanding   the 


408  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

force  and  satisfactoriness  of  the  testimony,  there  are 
many  infidels  and  unbelievers  in  the  world — many 
who  pay  no  regard  to  their  momentous  truths  and 
awful  warnings. 

Hence  it  is  evident  that  there  must  be,  on  the 
part  of  man,  that  moral  element  which  we  call  Faith 
— a  disposition,  or  at  least,  a  willingness  to  believe — 
to  make  him  feel  satisfied  with  the  evidence,  and  to 
induce  him,  on  the  strength  of  it,  to  receive  the  Scrip- 
tures as  the  Word  of  Grod,  or  Jesus  Christ  as  his  Lord 
and  Saviour. 

I  will  not  here  inquire  how  far  this  faith  is  to  be 
regarded  as  the  gift  of  Grod,  and  how  far  it  is  to  be 
considered  a  voluntary  exercise  of  the  faculties  of 
which  each  individual  is  capable,  and  for  which  he  is 
responsible.  But  its  existence  cannot  be  denied,  with- 
out shutting  our  eyes  to  the  fact  that  there  is  unbelief 
even  among  those  who  profess  to  have  freely  weighed 
the  evidence. 
To  deny  the        ^  S2.  Nor  can  we-  deny  that  the   evi- 

sufficiency   of  J  J 

the  evidence  is  dence  in  these  cases,  or  in  any  other  in  which 

to   impeach  ^      .  .  .     .. 

God.  vj-od  requires  us  to  believe  anything,  or  has 

attached  any  importance  to  our  believing  or  doing 
anything,  is  sufficient  to  throw  the  responsibility 
upon  us,  and  make  unbelief  itself  a  sin.  There  is 
such  a  thing  as  insufficient  evidence  ;  and  in  all  such 
cases  unbelief  implies  no  moral  fault,  no  guilt  on  the 
part  of  him  who  withholds  his  assent.  But  in  all  the 
cases  mentioned,  the  Messiah,  the  Bible,  the  Church, 
anything  in  regard  to  which  God  has  given  us  any 
commandment,  or  made  any  requisition  upon  us — the 
amount  of  evidence  is  just  what  Grod  Himself  has  seen 


XJ  EFFECTS   OF    SECTARIANISM.  409 

fit  to  give  us.  To  say  then  that  He  has  not  given  us 
evidence  enough  to  produce  conviction — unless  we 
ourselves  willfully  and  wickedly  interpose  some  obsta- 
cle, set  up  some  idol  in  our  hearts,  or  put  the  stumb- 
ling block  of  our  iniquity  before  our  faces — is  either  to 
accuse  Him  of  injustice  or  to  impeach  His  omniscience. 
It  implies,  either  that  He  did  not  know  what  evidence 
would  be  sufficient,  or  that  He  has  required  us  to  be- 
lieve under  circumstances,  when  the  best,  the  wisest, 
and  the  healthiest  exercise  of  the  faculties  He  has 
given  us  would  be  unbelief. 

*  33.  Now  all  this  is  as  applicable  to  the     ™9  i9  a8 

1  *  applicable  to 

Church  as  to  the  Scriptures,  or  to  the  Mes-  the  identity  of 

•    i  the  Church  as 

Sjan-  to    the   Scrip- 

It  is  an  institution  concerning  which,  as  tures  or  to  tne 

..  -,      ,     .  Lord  Himself. 

we  have  seen,  (rod  has  given  us  command- 
ments, and  made  requisitions  upon  us,  and  with  which 
He  has  connected  many  and  precious  promises.  It 
must  be  admitted,  therefore,  that  He  has  given  us  the 
means  and  opportunities  of  doing  what  He  thus  re- 
quires; and  among  these,  first  and  foremost,  is  suffi- 
oient  evidence  of  the  identity  of  that  Church  with 
which  these  commands,  requisitions,  and  promises  are 
connected. 

If  the  evidence,  is  not  in  itself  sufficient,  it  is  the 
fault  of  Mini  whose,  province  it  was  to  famish  the 
evidenoe.  It  implies  thai  G-od  did  not  know  what 
would  be  sufficient,  <>r  oould  not  furnish  if,  or  finally, 
thai  He  was  so  unjust,  to  say  nothing  of  His  love  and 
mercy,  as   not  to  do  what    Me  could,  and   what  He 

knew  to  he   \\\>\   ;md   0000888  r v . 

Hence  the  Church  must  be  an  object  of  faith.     It 
IS 


410  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

has  always  been  so,  and  such  it  always  must  be.  We  can 
have  no  direct  intuition,  no  direct  supernatural  com- 
munication of  the  fact.  Even  in  the  days  of  our  Lord 
and  the  Apostles,  when  miracles  were  wrought  and 
supernatural  gifts  conferred,  the  Church  was  an  ob- 
ject of  faith.  If  Christ  was  the  Son  of  God,  if  the 
Apostles  were  truly  such,  if  the  miracles  were  genuine, 
there  was  indeed  no  room  to  doubt  that  the  society 
and  fellowship  of  the  Disciples  was  the  Church  and 
kino-dom  of  Grod.  But  these  premisses,  each  of  them, 
were  objects  that  tried  the  faith  of  the  people  of  that 

age. 

The  points  which  try  our  faith  are  different  indeed 
from  theirs,  but  that  does  not  alter  the  main  condi- 
tion, viz. ;  that  the  reception  of  the  Church  is  with  us 
as  it  was  with  them,  and  was  with  them  as  it  is  with 
us — an  act  of  faith.  With  this  moral  element,  men 
are  satisfied  with  the  evidence,  without  it  they 
would  not  be  convinced  with  any  amount  that  does 
not  take  from  them  their  moral  freedom. 

opposition        §  34.  Now  from  this  we  may  proceed  to 
to  the  church  anotner  remark,  which  indeed  follows  from 

leads   to    Infi-  7 

deiity.  the  foregoing,  namely,  that  the  rejection  of 

the  Church  tends  to  infidelity. 

As  a  general  thing,  the  identity  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  with  the  Church  of  Christ  is  not 
denied.  None  of  the  Protestant  Sects  deny  that  we 
are  a  true  and  living  branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ  in 
the  fullest  sense  of  the  word.  And  although  they  claim 
the  same  for  themselves,  yet  they  do  not  claim  that 
they  are  any  of  them,  continuous  branches  of  that  vis- 


X.]  EFFECTS   OF   SECTARIANISM.  411 

ble  Church  which  was  instituted  by  our  Lord  in  the 
days  of  His  sojourn  on  earth. 

Hence,  in  opposing  the  Church  and  advocating 
their  own  as  positive  visible  institutions,  they  are 
seeking  to  persuade  people  to  adopt,  instead  of  the 
Church  which  Grod  instituted,  a  voluntary  association 
of  their  own,  which  is  confessedly  of  human  origin. 

I  need  not  therefore  go  into  an  investigation  of  the 
character  of  the  objections  that  are  made  against  the 
Church  in  detail,  to  show  that  they  all  tend  towards 
infidelity.  For,  be  they  what  they  may,  so  long  as  it 
is  not  denied  that  our  branch  of  the  Church,  is  a 
branch  of  the  Church  of  God,  or  maintained  that  these 
Sects  originated  with  the  Apostles,  and  have  contin- 
ued down  from  their  days,  the  leading  design  and 
the  main  influence  of  all  objections  against  the  Church, 
and  all  arguments  in  favor  of  any  Sect,  are  to  per- 
suade men  to  prefer  the  device  or  institution  of  man 
to  the  institution  and  commandment  of  God. 

And  this  is  the  essence  of  infidelity.  Men,  or  a 
society  of  them  absolutely  without  religion,  is  not  the 
object  of  any  of  those  who  oppose  revealed  religion. 
They  .ill  have  some  sysl em  of  their  own,  which,  under 
some  namr  <»r  another,  they  are  seeking  to  introduce. 
They  may  call  it  "philosophy,"  "enlightened  reason," 
"common  sense,"  or  "  nature,"  or  whatever  they  pre- 
fer. I »i n  always  they  propose  some  substitute  foi  that 
religion  which  they  oppose.  They  always  aim  to  sub- 
stitute something  else  tor  the  Revelations  and  the  In- 
Mitutious  of  Grod.  Hence  they  deny  the  obligation 
of  what  came  from  Him,  and  the  Superiority  of  Ltfl  6X- 

oellenoy. 


412  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

The  reasoning  of  those  who  under  the  pretence  of 
religion  oppose  the  Church,  does  not  deny  the  fact  of 
its  historic  identity.  Nor  does  it  claim  a  like  identity 
with  the  Church  of  Christ  for  any  of  the  Protestant 
Sects.  But  it  finds  fault  with  the  Church,  with  its 
doctrines,  with  its  discipline,  with  its  worship,  with 
its  piety,  with  what  they  are  pleased  to  call  its  re- 
straints upon  the  moral  freedom  of  man.  It  aims  to 
show,  that  in  all  these  respects  and  in  many  others, 
some  one  or  more  of  these  Sects,  which  are  confessedly 
of  human  origin,  is  far  preferable,  if  not  better  in  point 
of  intrinsic  worth. 

Now  we  will  not  deny  but  that  the  Church,  like 
everything  else  committed  to  human  keeping  and  ad- 
ministration, may  err  and  become  corrupt.  But  yet  it 
is  the  Divine  Institution ;  Christ  is  still  its  head,  and 
its  members  are  in  communion  with  Him,  if  they  are 
true  and  faithful  to  the  privileges  which  their  mem- 
bership in  it  gives  them. 

To  affirm,  therefore,  that  anv  other  Church  or  in- 
stitution,  designed  for  the  same  general  purpose,  can 
be  as  good  as  that  which  (rod  has  instituted,  is  to 
deny  His  wisdom,  His  veracity,  His  power.  And, 
since  these  are  fundamental  and  essential  attributes, 
to  deny  them,  is  in  fact  to  deny  that  He  is  Grod. 

I  am  indeed  far  from  charging  all  those  who  reject 
and  oppose  the  Church,  with  the  design  of  favoring 
infidelity.  But  there  can  be  no  denying  that  men's 
exertions  often  tend  to  and  produce  results  which  they 
neither  foresaw  nor  desired.  How  far  their  sincerity 
and  good  intentions  may  be  an  excuse  in  the  day  of 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  413 

judgment  for  the  evil  that  has  resulted  from  their  doc- 
trines, is  not  a  question  for  us  to  decide. 

But,  so  long  as  our  identity  with  the  Church  of 
Christ — that  is,  the  fact  that  we  are  a  part  of  His 
Church — is  not  denied,  all  inducements  and  argun  ents 
which  are  held  out  to  lead  people  to  join  something 
else  instead  of  this  branch  of  the  Church,  involves  the 
essence  of  infidelity,  and  tends  to  produce  actual  and 
avowed  infidelity.  If  the  institutions  of  God  may  be 
inferior  to  those  which  man  has  originated  in  one  par- 
ticular, why  not  in  all  ?  If  His  will  may  be  set 
aside  in  order  to  follow  our  own  in  one  point,  why  not 
altogether?  No  answer  can  be  given  to  these  ques- 
tions which  will  arrest  the  onward  current  of  down- 
ward tendencies  thus  commenced,  until  all  reverence 
for  things  sacred  is  gone,  and  faith  itself  has  disap- 
peared in  the  abounding  unbelief. 

I  might  refer  to  the  historic  developments  of  those 
St'.'ts  which  have  been  set  up  in  opposition  to  the 
Church.  Their  course  has  always  and  almost  prover- 
bially been  downward.  It  is  a  most  full  and  complete 
commentary  on  the  doctrine  of  St.  Paul — "  the  Church 
of  the  Living  God,  the  Pillar  and  Ground  of  the 
Truth." 

$  35.   But  again,  since  the  Church  is  an     Ti.echur.-h 
institution  <»t  (rod,  and  one  in  its  nature  in-  lrUl,   i|lt 
chiding  bo  many  other  institutions  and  com- 
mands of  His — the  true  and  healthy  develoj >nt  of 

man's    religious    nature    can    be    found    only    in    the 
Churoh. 

TIk-  religious  sentimenl  is  perhaps  the  most  deep- 
rooted  and  ineradicable  of  any  in  the  human  oonstitu- 


414  THE    CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

tion.  It  is  certainly  one  of  the  most  easy  to  be  per- 
verted. Its  worst  perversion  is  seen  perhaps  in  the 
profane  blasphemy  of  God's  holy  name  and  attributes 
that  is  so  prevalent.  Another  form  is  seen  in  that 
idola  ry  which  bestows  upon  created  objects  and  blocks 
of  wood  and  stone,  the  adoration  due  to  God  alone. 
But  superstition  and  fanaticism  are  undoubtedly  per- 
versions of  this  sentiment,  and  deformities  in  the  man- 
ner of  its  development  and  manifestations.  Perhaps 
we  may  say  that  superstition  results  from  the  accu- 
mulation of  forms  and  ceremonies  in  religion  which 
God  has  not  ordained,  and  fanaticism  from  the  oppo- 
site extreme  of  turning  the  attention  inwardly  upon 
one's  own  feelings  and  convictions,  to  the  disparage- 
ment or  neglect  of  outward  duties  and  the  institutions 
which  God  has  ordained. 

Now,  the  revelation  of  God  was  designed  to  guide 
the  religious  sentiment,  and  to  produce  its  healthy  de- 
velopment into  piety,  meekness,  humility,  holiness, 
and  love.  Consequently,  when  that  revelation  is  de- 
parted from  in  any  important  particular, — whether  it 
be  in  the  accumulated  forms  of  the  Papal  system,  or 
in  the  excitements  and  machinery  of  the  revival  sys- 
tem— some  perversion  of  the  religious  sentiment  must 
be  the  inevitable  result. 

Of  the  correctness  of  this  conclusion  we  need  no 
other  proof  than  that  which  is  to  be  derived  from  the 
undeniable  facts  admitted  and  claimed  by  the  two 
classes  of  persons  referred  to. 

The  Papists  admit  that  they  have  made  additions 
to  the  original  system  of  faith  and  worship  as  it  came 
from  God,  and  claim  that  they  have  a  right  to  do  so. 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  415 

Now  without  discussing  the  right  to  make  these 
additions,  we  will  content  ourselves  for  the  present 
with  the  remark,  that  if  their  piety  were  like  that  of 
our  Lord  and  the  Apostles — that  is,  pure  and  genuine, 
they  would  have  no  disposition  or  desire  to  change  or 
modify,  by  adding  to  or  taking  from  the  faith  and  wor- 
ship, the  forms  and  doctrines,  which  they  introduced, 
and  with  which  their  souls  were  satisfied. 

The  position  which  the  Protestant  Sects  take  is 
different  in  form  though  demonstrative  of  the  same 
fact  in  reference  to  our  present  train  of  remark. 

They  all  contend  that  the  Church  at  a  very  early 
age  became  corrupt,  and  at  length  apostate.  In  other 
words,  it  appears  that  the  idea  of  religion  which  pre- 
vailed in  the  early  ages  of  the  Church,  was  very  un- 
like that  which  the  Sects  now  entertain,  and  that  at 
length  it  became  totally  unlike  it,  not  in  degree  only, 
but  also  in  kind.  Now  when  we  call  this  difference 
an  apostacy,  we  apply  to  it  a  name  which  indicates 
our  opinion  concerning  it,  rather  than  the  fact  itself. 
The  fact  itself  is  the  utter  contrariety  between  the  re- 
ligious character  of  those  Sects  and  that  of  the  Church 
before  the  Reformation.  Now  without  saying  that 
this  fact,  in  itself  considered,  may  as  well  prove  their 
own  apostacy  as  that  the  Church  was  then  apostate, 
We    may    safely    say    that    there,    must    be   something 

wrong  in  the  faith  and  in  the  religious  feelings  of 
those  who  can  regard  thai  Churoh,  with  which  the 
Holy  Spirit  was  promised  to  abide  for  ever ;  which  St. 
Paul  deolared  to  be  the  Pillar  and  Ground  of  the 
Truth;  and  with  which  our  blessed  Lord  promised  His 
pi*-. nee  always,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world,  and 


416  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

against  which  He  said  that  the  gates  of  hell  should 
never  prevail — as  being  apostate.  The  Divine  promises 
are  our  guarantee  that  it  had  not  become  apostate  ; 
and  the  opinion  of  those  who  so  regard  it  shows  that 
their  own  religious  feelings  and  condition  are  so  dif- 
ferent from  it  that  they  cannot  be  wholly  right  them- 
selves. 

I  need  not  refer  then  to  the  instances  of  extrava- 
gant superstition  on  the  one  side  and  of  fanaticism  on 
the  other,  as  proof  that  the  truest  religion  must  be  in 
the  Church,  and  in  connection  with  "  the  Faith  once 
delivered  to  the  Saints."  The  position  is  too  obviously 
true  to  require  proof.  Let  a  man  depart  from  the 
right  ways  of  the  Lord  on  either  side,  either  to  the 
right  hand  or  to  the  left,  and  a  peversion  of  his  own 
religious  feelings  and  of  his  opinions  on  subjects  con- 
nected with  religion,  is  the  inevitable  result.  The  mind 
is  enslaved  to  superstition  or  bewildered  with  fanati- 
cism. You  may  see  people  worshipping  a  cross  or  a 
relic  as  though  it  were  their  Saviour  :  or,  in  the  ex- 
travagance of  their  fanaticism,  claiming  a  sinless  per- 
fection of  life,  or  a  freedom  with  the  ineffable  Majesty 
of  heaven,  that  strikes  modesty  and  humility  with 
silent  horror. 

It  is  not  improbable  but  that  the  great  lesson  which 
we  of  this  age  have  to  learn,  is  that  the  adversaries 
of  Christianity  against  which  we  have  most  to  be 
on  our  guard,  are  those  who  attack,  disparage  and 
undermine  the  positive  institutions  of  our  religion 
under  the  pretence  of  Christianity  itself.  They  sap 
the  very  foundations  of  the  Heavenly  City,  while 
they  profess  to  be  building  its  walls  and  strengthening 


X]  EFFECTS    OF   SECTARIANISM.  417 

its  fortresses.  They  teach  men  to  be  irreverent  and 
indocile,  while  they  profess  to  be  bringing  them  to 
Christ ;  and  yet  if  they  are  brought  there  without  the 
most  self-abasing  and  reverential  humility,  and  the 
most  childlike  docility,  it  can  be  only  to  hear  the 
withering  repulse,  "  Depart  from  me,  I  know  you  not 
whence  you  are." 

Perhaps  I  cannot  better  conclude  this  work,  than 
by  some  reflections  upon  the  effects  of  the  present 
divided  state  of  Christendom. 

I  trust,  that  we  may  now  say,  with  the  concur- 
rence of  all  persons  in  our  statement,  that  the  day  has 
gone  by  when  it  is  regarded  as  a  blessing  that  there 
are  so  many  different  Churches  and  Sects,  so  that 
each  may  find  a  view  of  religion  that  will  suit  himself. 

The  foregoing  remarks  will  show  that  such  a  view 
is  l>;is»'d  upon  a  principle  utterly  subversive  of  all  the 
good  effects  of  Christianity  upon  man.  It  loses  sight 
of  the  faot,  that  man  needs  to  be  converted  to  Christ, 
and  that,  until  he  is  converted,  he  cannot  be  expected 
heartily  to  approve  of  all  that  He  has  taught.  But  if 
we  atari  with  the  idea  that  men  are  to  have  such  a 
virw  of  Christianity  as  they  like,  and  consequently 
that  there  may  he  many  churches,  each  of  which  are 
equally  good — the  choice  between  them  being  purely 
a  matter  of  personal  preference  with  individuals — we 
art-  reversing  the  fundamental  fact,  that  man  should 
be  oonverted  to  Christ  and  Christianity,  and  nol 
Christianit)  itself  undergo  the  ohange,  and  b<-  oon- 
Terted  to  man. 

$  on\   Let    it    thm   be    understood,  as  a    ('hri*t"",i,y 

■  I-.  cmiiiui    be 

most    tunuamental    point,    that    Christianity  ohu««L 
1^* 


418  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap 

cannot  be  changed  without  ceasing  to  be  the  Religion 
of  Christ — the  way  to  the  favor  of  Grod,  and  to  the 
salvation  of  the  human  soul. 

The  origin  *  ^'  ^ne  origm  °f  every  Sect  is  an  at- 
of  sects  an  tempt  to  adapt  Christianity  to  the  wants  ot 
change  cims-  the  times,  or  the  preferences  of  men.  It  is, 
tiamty.  therefore,  an  act  of  violence  upon  the  origi- 

nal system.  And  in  this  attempt  men  are  very  likely 
to  lose  sight  of  the  ultimate  aim  of  the  Religion,  and 
settle  down  into  some  subordinate  or  heterogeneous 
one.  Thus  the  inculcation  of  a  certain  view  of  some 
particular  doctrine,  or  the  promotion  of  certain  moral 
or  political  reforms,  has  not  unfrequently  occasioned 
the  origin  of  a  new  Sect.  This  object  is  first  identi- 
fied in  the  thoughts  of  its  founders  with  Christianity, 
and  then  substituted  for  it.  Such  is  the  history  of 
the  rise,  progress,  and  final  result,  of  Sects  in  general. 
§  38.  It  is  obvious  that  the  presentation 

Sectarian-  * 

ism  throws  of  so  many  creeds  and  theories,  as  the  Gros- 

Difficulties  in        ,      f    Qfafa.  h  no       th  ff      fc  th 

the  way  of  dis-  r  ' 

covering  the  a  confusion  and    bewildering  of  those  who 

Truth.  ill-  •  c  i  ,i 

would  be  sincere  inquirers  alter  the  truth. 
The  subject  is  now  so  complicated  that  no  one,  whose 
mind  and  time  is  occupied  with  any  important  secular 
business — a  condition  in  which  the  vast  majority  of 
people  must  always  of  necessity  be  placed — can  make 
himself  master  of  the  whole,  and  see  his  way  clearly 
through  its  labyriuthian  windings. 

sectarian-        $  39.    The    consequence    is,   that    these 
ism  diminish-  divisions  and  diversities  of  religion  serve  as 

es  the  number 

of  Professing  a  pretext  to  the  natural  disinclination  to  the 
restraints  and  obligations  of  the  Grospel,  for 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF   SECTARIANISM.  419 

the  neglect  of  the  subject  altogether.  It  is  a  fact 
which  cannot  have  escaped  the  notice  of  any  observer, 
that  the  greatest  part  of  the  people  in  our  land  are  not 
professing  Christians  at  all.  They  join  in  the  observ- 
ance of  Christian  ordinances  no  where.  I  think,  be- 
yond a  question,  that  there  never  has  been  an  age,  or 
a  nation  since  the  introduction  of  Christianity  to  the 
world,  where — after  it  had  been  fairly  introduced — 
there  was  so  large  a  portion  of  the  people  living  in 
utter  disregard  of  its  requirements,  as  there  is  now, 
and  in  this  country.  Or  to  put  the  same  thought  into 
another  form  :  assuming  that  a  public  profession  of 
religion  and  the  observance  of  its  ordinances  are  re- 
quired as  conditions  of  salvation,  there  probably  never 
was  a  people,  that  bore  the  Christian  name,  of  whom 
so  small  a  portion  only  are,  to  all  human  appearances, 
entitled  to  the  hope  of  salvation.  All  this,  I  say,  is 
true,  on  the  most  enlarged  and  liberal  principles.  The 
assertion  is  made  without  regarding  schism  and  here- 
sy as  sins  which  can  at  all  endanger  the  souls  of  those 
involved  in  them. 

It  is  a  solemn  and  melancholy  fact,  that  in  this  na- 
tion, the  mosl  enlightened  and  libera]  on  the  face  of 
the  earth — where  freedom  of  thought  and  the  right  of 
private  judgment  are  encouraged  as  they  are  nowhere 
«l>. — whnv  humanity  is  left  to  the  most  unrestrained 
liberty  of  development  and  progress — the  number  of 
souls  thai  can  be  regarded  as  within  the  covenanted 
conditions  of  salvation,  is  less  than  in  any  other  por« 
tion  of  the  Christianized  world.  \<-t  the  fact  is  un- 
deniably  so. 

$    1".  Tier.-  m  1 .- 1  \  be  man)  causes  for  the  irreligion 


420  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

a  ,  of  our  ase  and  nation.     Thus  the  amount  of 

Several  o 

causes  for  the  attention  that  is  paid  to  intellectual  culture, 
the  American  and  the  cultivation  of  the  sciences,  by 
People.  occupying  the  mind  and  attention,  may  be 

the  reason  why  many  are  so  thoughtless  of  religion. 
Again,  the  opening  of  the  road  to  wealth  and  to  power 
to  all  men,  by  abolishing  all  hereditary  estates,  titles, 
and  offices,  has  given  an  impulse  to  ambition — in  those 
who  possess  aggrandizements  to  retain  them,  and  in 
those  who  have  them  not  to  acquire  them — that  ab- 
sorbs the  energies  of  a  large  number  of  persons,  to 
whom  religion  would  be  only  a  hindrance  in  the  ac- 
complishment of  their  wishes.  I  admit  that  almost 
all  the  circumstances  of  our  outward  condition  con- 
spire against  spirituality.  So  unstable  is  everything, 
that  men  are  engrossed  with  an  unceasinsr  effort  either 
to  get  or  to  keep  worldly  advantages. 

§  41.  But  these  are  not  the  chief  causes. 

Sectan  a  n- 

ism  the  chief  Doubtless  they  add  vigor  to  the  natural  in- 
clination to  say  to  the  gospel  invitations,  "I 
pray  thee  have  me  excused  ; "  "  when  I  have  a  more 
convenient  season  I  will  call  for  thee."  But  the  chief 
cause  of  this  state  of  things,  so  saddening  to  the  heart 
of  him  who  wishes  well  to  the  souls  of  men,  is  the 
prevalence  of  sectarianism. 

§  42.  In  considering  this  subject,  a  vast 

Divers  ef-  o  j 

fects  of  secta-  field  opens  before  the  mind.     Sectarianism 

nanism  stated.  i  ■,      ,->  1 1  i  *  , 

cripples  and  thwarts  all  our  attempts  to 
convert  the  heathen  ;  it  produces  unbounded  infidelity 
at  home  ;  the  disconnection  of  religion  from  our  means 
and  systems  of  educating  the  young ;  and  a  very  low 


X]  EFFECTS    OF   SECTARIANISM.  421 

standard  of  attainment  among  those  of  maturer  years 
who  profess  to  be  believers. 

$  43.  The  English  nation,  by  adopting  its  effects, 
the  policy  of  extending  the  Church  where- on  Mission9- 
ever  they  extend  their  civil  dominion,  have  indeed 
made  rapid  strides  in  the  missionary  work,  within  the 
last  few  centuries.  It  is  now  computed  that  Queen 
Victoria  is  the  sovereign  of  about  one-seventh  part 
of  the  whole  population  of  the  globe.  And  wherever 
she  goes  she  carries  the  religion  of  Christ  with  her. 

But  besides  her  efforts,  very  little,  comparatively, 
has  been  accomplished,  when  we  consider  the  vast 
amount  of  men  and  money  that  have  been  expended 
in  the  cause.  Scarcely  could  one  denomination  make 
a  beginning  in  any  place,  before  some  one  or  more  of 
the  others  would  send  their  missionaries  there  also. 
They  carry  with  them  the  sectarian  feelings  by  which 
they  were  actuated  at  home.  Each  claims  to  show 
the  true  way  of  life,  yet  each  has  a  different  way.  To 
the  heathen,  accustomed  as  they  are  to  the  idea  of 
many  g"ds,  each  having  a  worship  peculiar  to  him- 
self, and  only  one,  the  diversity  between  the  different 
denominations  i-  as  great,  and  in  fact,  is  the  same  as 
if  each  denomination  preached  a  different  religion,  and 
were  believers  in  as  many  different  gods.  And  when 
this  difficulty  is  overcome,  how  often  have  the  devo- 
tees "i"  blind  superstition,  and  the  worshippers  of  false 
gods,  s;i'nl  t<»  the  emissaries  "t  the  Cross — "agree 
among  yourselves  what  the  religion  of  Christ  is,  ami 

then  we  will  <j\\r.  our  attention  to  its  olaims." 

$  11.  Prom  the  very  Limited  means  of  investiga- 
tion withm  my  reach,  I  am  incline. I  to  think  that  there 


422  THE   CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

The  small  is   not  more   than  one  in  ten  of  our  adult 
number  who  p0pUiation  who  make  a  public  profession  ol 

are  in  the  way  r    r  r  r 

of  salvation.  Christianity,  by  a  regular  observance  of  the 
stated  ordinances  required  by  the  denominations  to 
which  they  may  severally  belong.  In  this  estimate  I 
include  all  denominations,  of  whatever  name  or  kind; 
I  include  all  who  call  themselves  Christians,  and  not 
merely  those  who  would  be  included  by  the  rule  or 
standard  of  any  one  denomination.  For  myself,  I  am 
unwilling  to  lay  down  any  standard  or  test  by  which 
to  decide  at  present,  who  will  obtain  everlasting  sal- 
vation. If  one  asks  what  he  shall  do  to  be  saved,  I, 
of  course,  as  my  duty  requires,  have  a  ready  answer. 
And  if  he  does  not  do  it,  I  can  tell  him  that  he  has  not 
complied  with  the  conditions  of  salvation,  and  there- 
fore has  no  right  to  expect  it.  But  that  he  will  not 
obtain  it,  is  more  than  I  consider  myself  authorized 
to  affirm. 

Reasons  for        $  45.  Though  it  be  undoubtedly  true,  as 
hoping  for  a  Tertullian  has  said,  that  "  the  Faith  is  fixed 

merciful  con-  , 

structionofthein  a  rule,  it  hath  a  law,  and  in  the  keeping 
Divine  Law.    of  fhat  jaw  saivation,"  and  though  God  has 

no  where  told  us  that  in  the  final  judgment  He  will 
deal  with  us  more  mercifully  than  the  terms  of  His 
law  require,  yet  we  may  perhaps  be  permitted  to  hope 
that  such  will  be  the  case.  In  judging  of  the  outward 
acts,  He  will  estimate  them,  doubtless,  by  the  motives 
and  intentions  of  the  heart.  These  motives  and  in- 
tentions are  in  all  cases,  to  a  considerable  extent,  and 
in  many  cases  almost  entirely,  the  result  of  previous 
information,  education,  and  experience.  To  a  certain 
extent,  however — an  extent  which  will  probably  vary 


X.]  EFFECTS   OF   SECTARIANISM.  423 

with  each  individual — we  are  responsible  for  the  state 
of  our  thoughts  and  feelings  ourselves. 

If,  now,  the  prevalence  of  sectarianism — the  pre- 
senting such  a  variety  of  doctrines  and  precepts  by 
the  preachers  of  the  different  denominations — has  so 
confused  the  subject,  in  the  apprehension  of  the  com- 
mon mind,  as  that  for  the  most  part  people  do  not 
know  what  to  believe  or  do,  and  from  not  having  the 
right  way  presented  clearly  before  them,  without  any 
of  the  obscurations  of  controversy,  denial  or  substitu- 
tion, a  general  indifference  to  the  subject  of  religion 
supervenes,  and  the  common  sentiment  and  feeling  of 
community  is  moulded  thereby,  we  cannot  doubt  that 
this  will  form  an  excuse  for  much  that  would  other- 
wist;  be  inexcusable  in  favor  of  many  who  are  not 
strictly  within  the  terms  of  the  Covenant. 

On  the  ground  of  considerations  like  these,  we 
may  entertain  hopes  that  the  final  condition  of  many 
of  <>ur  fellow-citizens  will  be  better  than  we  should 
otherwise  venture  to  hope.  The  cause  of  their  omis- 
sion of  a  required  duty  is  not  any  perverseness  of  their 

OWII  will,  hut  the  result   of  the  faults  of  those  who  call 

themselves  Christians.  Their  ungodly  lives,  their  con- 
tradictions, their  content  ions  and  rivalries,  their  secta- 
rian /»;il — often  showing  more  anxiety  to  gain  a 
proselyte  to  their  Sect  than  to  convert  a  soul  to 
Christ — is  a  stumbling-block  over  winch  multitudes 
will  fall.  Ami  shall  ii"t  the  consequences  of  the  fall 
!"■  visited  upon  him  who  plaoed  the  simnhlmLr-hloek 
in  the  way  of  his  brother,  rather  than  upon  him  who 
fell  over  it  ! 

Among   those    who   an-    left    in  the   darkness  of 


424  THE  CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

heathenism,  we  not  unfrequently  see  a  sincerity,  a 
zeal  and  a  single-hearted  devotion — bestowed  indeed 
upon  a  mistaken  object — which,  if  the  object  were  the 
true  God,  would  place  these  persons  among  the 
brightest  ornaments  of  the  Christian  name.  Among 
the  children  who,  by  the  act  of  Providence,  are  placed 
in  their  tender  years  under  the  care  of  those  who  sus- 
tain no  natural  relations  to  them,  we  often  see  illus- 
trations of  filial  duty  and  affection  towards  these 
foster-parents  that  constitute  an  example  worthy  of 
the  imitation  of  those  whose  real  parents  are  left,  by 
the  Providence  of  God,  to  be  the  objects  of  these  senti- 
ments. So,  too,  there  is  doubtless  much  in  the  world, 
that  does  not  now  appear  under  the  Christian  name, 
which  would  be  in  a  condition  to  be  considered  the 
fulfillment  of  the  terms  and  requirements  of  the  Cove- 
nant, if  the  misfortunes  of  our  age  and  nation  had  not 
exerted  their  influence  upon  it. 

These,  and  many  other  considerations,  make  us 
hopeful,  even  against  the  strictness  of  the  letter  of  the 
law. 

$  46.  While  the  Word  of  Grod  abounds 

The  respon- 
sibility    for  in  plain  and  awful  warnings  against  depart- 

Sins     often  ureg  from  th      Ru,e       f   p    ^         d      fe      Q 
rests    with  w»»* 

those  who  do  munion  of  the  Saints,  as  though  the  full  and 
be  the^mme^  entire  responsibility  for  each  soul  rested 
diate  agents  of  with  itself,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  a  large 
Bion.  share  of  the  responsibility  is   placed  upon 

those  who  are  sent  to  be  Preachers  of  the 
Gospel — or  set  in  places  of  influence  and  authority — 
so  as  to  be  looked  up  to  by  others.  St.  Paul,  in  wri- 
ting to  the  Hebrews,  says,  that  the  Ministry  watch  for 


X]  EFFECTS   OF   SECTARIANISM.  425 

souls  as  they  that  must  give  account.  He  says  to 
Timothy,  that  by  taking  heed  to  himself,  and  to  his 
teaching,  he  should  save  both  his  own  soul  and  the 
souls  of  them  that  hear  him.  The  condemnation, 
therefore,  which  it  seems  at  first  thought  must  over- 
whelm multitudes  of  our  fellow  men  at  the  last  day, 
may,  as  it  appears  on  further  consideration,  be  visited 
on  those  who  have  been  the  chief  cause  of  the  preva- 
lence of  such  a  bewildering  variety  of  religious 
teaching. 

$  47.  It  can  be  proved  from  General  rea-  Sectarianism 

1  .  .  D  the     Chief 

soning,  and  the  conclusion  is  confirmed  by  cause  of  so 
abundant  experience,  that  the  comparatively  fe^.  bein£ 
small  number  of  adults  in  our  country  who  covenanted 

i-     •  -,1  •        ,,  i  ■  •<•  conditions    of 

are  living  within  the  terms  and  conditions  Mercy< 
of  the  covenant  of  salvation,  is  the  result  of 
sectarianism. 

It  operates  in  various  ways.  By  presenting  so 
many  systems  as  true,  ;m  impression  is  made  on  the 
mind  of  the  unconverted  that  none  of  them  are  true, 
and  perhaps  that  the  truth  itself  cannot  be  of  any 
great  importance,  even  if  it  can  be  ascertained.  It 
presents  occasions  for  contentions  and  jealous  feelings 
among  the  different  Sects,  which  beget  a  disgust  for 
the  whole  subject  of  religion — a  belief  that  it  is  all 
hypocrisy  and  imposture,  among  those  on  whom  the 
influence  Of  religion  is  most  needed.  It  presents  so 
many  different  forms  and  doctrines,  that  many,  who 
are  convinced  of  the  importance  of  the  snbjeot  in 
general)  and  are  anxious  to  make  a  profession  of  reli- 
gion somewhere,  often  delay  year  after  year,  in  hopes 
that  they  will  lin»l  time  and  an  opportunity  to  look  into 


426  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

and  comprehend  the  whole  subject  before  they  finally 
make  up  their  minds.  During  this  interval  multi- 
tudes are  called  away  to  their  final  account. 

Now,  if  I  may  be  permitted  to  judge  of  the  expe- 
rience of  others  by  my  own,  and  by  what  I  have 
known  of  theirs,  there  js  no  apology  or  excuse  so  often 
given  for  the  non-attendance  upon  the  religious  duties 
required  by  Grod  in  His  Gospel,  as  the  fact  that  there 
are  so  many  different  denominations  that  no  one  can 
tell  which  is  right — that  they  do  not  yet  sufficiently 
understand  the  subject  to  take  a  decided  stand  any 
where. 

"Without  stopping  to  consider  who  is  to  be  blamed 
for  it,  the  fact,  I  suppose,  cannot  be  denied,  therefore, 
that  sectarianism  is  the  principal  cause  of  the  infi- 
delity— practical  or  speculative — which  abounds  in 
our  land.  And  because  of  the  prevalence  of  this  evil, 
we  are  compelled  to  see  the  multitudes  going  on  in 
the  "  broad  road  that  leads  to  death,"  notwithstanding 
that  Blood  has  flowed  from  the  Redeemer's  broken 
Body  and  pierced  side,  in  abundance  sufficient  for  the 
sins  of  the  whole  world. 

The  state  of  *  4^.    *    naV<3  n0t    n0W    witmn    my  reacn 

things  differ-  anv  statistics,  of  a  very  dignified  or  reliable 
o^iy  "one^D^-  character,  to  which  I  can  appeal,  but  I  refer 
nomination  jn  general  terms  to  what  is  known  of  those 
countries  in  which  there  is  but  one  denomia- 
tion,  or  church,  generally  prevalent.  Without  refer- 
ring, now,  to  countries  in  which  the  Roman  Obedience 
prevails,  or  where  the  Oriental  Communion  is  in  pos- 
session of  the  jurisdiction — as  in  Russia,  for  instance — 
we  shall  see  in   Sweden,  a  Protestant   country,   an 


X]  EFFECTS   OF    SECTARIANISM.  427 

example  that .  strongly  confirms  our  conclusion.  In 
these  countries  the  children  are  all  baptized  in  in- 
fancy ;  they  are  taught  the  fundamental  Articles  of 
the  Christian  Faith,  as  they  are  received  by  those 
Churches,  more  carefully,  in  fact,  than  we  teach  our 
children  the  common  branches  of  an  English  educa- 
tion ;  and  there  is  but  little,  if  any,  more  disposition  to 
deny  them,  or  to  neglect  the  duties  growing  out  of 
them,  as  those  Churches  inculcate  those  duties,  than 
we  see  among  us  to  deny  the  principles  of  science 
which  are  taught  in  our  most  approved  books  of  in- 
struction. The  children  are  regarded,  from  the  mo- 
ment of  their  Baptism,  as  Christians,  and  members  of 
the  Church.  In  its  communion  they  grow  up  ;  by  it 
their  opinions,  their  habits,  their  feelings,  and  their 
characters,  are  moulded,  to  a  very  great  extent ;  and 
an  irreligious  man,  according  to  their  standard  of  reli- 
gion, is  a  phenomenon  scarcely  to  be  met  with. 

An  approximation  to  this  state  of  things,  sufficient 
for  the  purposes  of  the  present  argument,  is  often  seen 
in  portions  even  of  our  own  country.  In  those  neigh- 
borhoods where  one  denomination  only  exists,  the 
people  are  to  a  very  much  greater  extent,  professors  of 
religion,  than  where  several  sects  present  their  rival 
claims  and  contradictory  views  of  the  way  of  salvation. 

This  is  the  direct  ami  natural  result  of  unity  of  in- 
struction. There  is  no  reason  why  there  should  not 
be  aa  universal  a  reception  of  the  fundamental  articles 
of  the  Christian  Faith,  if  there  were  the  same  unity 
of  instruction  and  testimony  in  regard  to  it.  as  there 
is  in  the  principles  of  English  Ghrammer,  Arithmetic 
or  Geography  ;   for  the  vast  majority  of  people  always 


428 


THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 


believe  and  act  as  they  are  taught.  But,  as  it  is,  the 
people  are  bewildered  by  the  multitude  of  varying 
and  contradictory  theories. 

§  49.  But  this  is  not  all.  The  standard 
ofl^ttn^of  religious  character  and  attainment  is 
tainment  re-  lowered  down  so  far,  that  even  many  of 
prevalent  <*  those  who  profess  to  be  Christians,  and  who 
sectarianism.  stanc[  wen_  as  sucn  in  the  general  estima- 
tion, can  hardly  be  considered  as  coming  much  more 
within  the  conditions  and  terms  of  the  Covenant  than 
those  who  make  no  pretensions  to  Christianity. 

It  will  be  quite  impossible,  within  the  limits  to 
which  we  are  now  confined,  to  give  any  adequate  idea 
of  the  coldness  and  indifference  of  our  own  age  in 
comparison  with  the  earlier  centuries.  The  bare 
mention  of  the  facts  that  the  Christians  then  met 
daily,  morning  and  evening,  for  public  worship  ;  that 
they  gave  at  least  one  tenth  of  their  income  to  the 
Church  for  religious  purposes — so  that  not  only  the 
Clergy  were  well  supported,  but  the  poor  also,  and 
converts,  who  by  the  change  in  their  religion  were 
obliged  to  abandon  their  former  mode  of  life — (a  thing 
which  was  by  no  means  unusual) — were  supplied  with 
all  the  necessaries  of  life,  and  persons  in  slavery  were 
redeemed  from  their  bondage  ;  and  all  this  from  the 
proceeds  of  the  devout  offerings  of  the  worshippers  ; 
and  that  the  Holy  Communion  was  administered  at 
least  every  Lord's  Day,  and  other  Holy  Days,  and 
sometimes  even  daily,  is,  in  this  age,  enough  to  lead 
many  to  think  that  we  are  speaking  of  ages  of  fanati- 
cism and  folly,  which  ought  to  be  regarded  rather  as 
a  warning  than  as  a  pattern  for  imitation,  or  an  ex- 


X.]  EFFECTS   OF   SECTARIANISM.  429 

ample  for  our  rebuke.  But  such  were  the  usages  of 
the  Church  in  the  earliest  ages  of  which  we  can  ob- 
tain any  account. 

And  these  were  real  acts  of  self-denial,  and  piety, 
and  renunciation  of  the  world.  They  took  time  and 
money  from  the  service  of  Mammon  and  devoted  them 
to  the  Lord.  What  a  death-blow  to  the  ambition,  the 
avarice,  the  luxury,  and  all  the  extravagant  and  sinful 
follies  of  our  age,  would  be  given  by  the  return  of 
that  spirit  of  devotion  which  would  make  these  usages 
characteristic  of  the  Christians  of  our  day  ! 

k  50.  That  Christianity  requires  of  men     Thisreduc- 

c    i-i  ij  c  'ion  is  chiefly 

a  renunciation  of  the  world,  a  practice  ofin  the  Do(J. 
self-denial  to  which,  by  the  instincts  of  their  trines  and  Du- 

,  ties  which  are 

nature,  or  the  circumstances  of  their  situa-  peculiar  to 
tiofl  in  life,  they  are  not  inclined,  is  held  by  Christlamty- 
all  persons.  Hence,  in  the  strife  among  the  Sects  to 
j_r;iin  numbers  and  outvie  each  other,  there  is  always 
a  strong  temptation  to  lower  down  the  standard,  and 
underbid,  as  it  were,  one  another,  while  they  hold  out 
equally  confident  assnranoes  of  salvation  to  all  who 
will  adopt  their  views  and   follow  their  guidance. 

Reasons  will  readily  occur  why  this  state  of 
things  should  be  less  likely  to  lower  the  standard  of 
morals  than  that  of  religion.  Any  open  and  avowed 
red  notion  of  the  moral  standard  would  defeat  the  ob- 
ject "  The  world"  will  be  likely,  as  it  always  has 
done,  t«»  test  a    man's  piety  by  what  it  calls    hi>   good- 

ness — that  is,  his  morality.  Hence  the  prevalence  of 
sectarianism  will  lead  to  the  nominal  elevation  of  the 
moral  standard]  while  doubtless  many  delinquencies 
that  can  easily  he  concealed  will  be  permitted  to  go 


430  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

unchecked,  and  the  opinion  may  prevail,  as  the  result, 
that  good  morality  is  the  best  thing  that  there  is  in 
religion,  if  not  its  only  valuable  element. 

But  the  reduction  of  the  standard  is  in  other  par- 
ticulars. Some  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  do  not 
flatter  the  human  understanding.  These  may,  one 
after  another,  be  pretermitted  as  unessential  and  open 
to  dispute,  and  finally  denied  as  erroneous ;  and  thus 
an  advance  towards  Deism,  if  not  Infidelity,  will  show 
what  is  the  influence  that  is  carrying  them  on. 

Again,  some  of  the  requirements  of  the  Grospel 
come  into  collision  with  our  plans  of  ease,  pleasure  or 
aggrandisement.  An  omission  of  these  is  at  first 
winked  at,  then  becomes  the  general  rule,  and  finally 
their  observance  is  reviled  as  superstition  and  formal- 
ity— a  relying  upon  works  to  the  disparagement  of 
the  corner-stone  of  Christian  Theology — justification 
by  faith.  Hence,  instead  of  a  Daily  Worship,  consist- 
ing of  reading  the  Scriptures  and  a  sacrifice  of  praise 
and  thanksgiving,  performed  as  both  a  duty  to  Grod 
and  a  pleasure  to  man,  people  will  scarcely  come  out 
once  in  a  week  even,  except  when  some  excitement 
or  pleasing  novelty  offers  its  gratification. 

Hence  we  have,  by  the  confession  of  all  persons, 
an  exceedingly  undevout  age.  And  many  doubtless, 
who  consider  themselves  in  "  the  enjoyment  of  re- 
ligion," are  carried  on  by  something  of  a  far  different 
character,  and  (as,  alas !  we  cannot  doubt)  many  will 
not  come  to  see  their  mistake  until  it  is  too  late  to 
amend  it. 

Let  any  denomination  in  our  ]and  insist  upon  the 
primitive  standard,   and  the  piety  of  earlier  days — 


X]  EFFECTS   OF    SECTARIANISM.  431 

when  the  fires  of  martyrdom  and  persecution  consum- 
ed the  dross  and  kept  at  a  distance  all  that  were  not 
prepared  to  deny  themselves  and  take  up  the  cross 
daily,  as  that  piety  was  tested — not  by  mere  feelings 
and  emotions  that  are  easily  excited  and  cost  nothing, 
but  by  those  outward  works  and  duties  which  break 
the  power  of  worldliness  and  avarice,  and  take  large 
portions  of  time  and  money  for  the  service  of  the 
Lorci — and  they  would  find  but  very  few  of  their 
members  comparatively,  remaining  to  fulfil  their  con- 
ditions of  church-membership. 

*  51.  I  am  limited  to  a  few  of  the  most     Theuau- 

enoe  of  Secta- 

common  topics,  and  my  space  is  nearly  ex-  nanism  on  ed- 
hausted.  I  cannot,  howe^r,  forbear  to  al-ucaion' 
lude  to  one  other  point,  and  that  is,  the  expulsion  of 
the  Bible  and  of  religious  instruction  from  our  com- 
mon schools.  It  is  true  that  each  denomination  may 
have  schools  of  its  own,  in  which  children  can  be 
trained  in  the  religious  opinions  and  usages  which 
they  prefer.  But  for  the  most  part  the  people  must 
depend  upon  our  public  schools.  And  these  schools, 
in  consequence  of  sectarian  jealousy  and  rivalry,  must 
be  without  religion.  They  are  open  to  all  Sects  and 
olassefl  of  persons,  and  no  one  of  them  will  consent 
that  Ins  children  shall  be  taught  the  religious  views 
of  the  others,  ;unl  therefore  none  can  be  inculcated. 

Hence  our  children  are  taught  all  the  principles  of 
secular  education,  all  tin  facts  of  history,  all  the  pre- 
pts  thai  are  expected  to  guide  them  to  usefulness 
and  respectability  io  the  world — as  things  about  which 
all  men  are  agreed,  and  the,  importance  of  which  is 
denied  by  no  one.      lint    religion  is  omitted,  as  either 


432  THE  CHURCH  IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

a  thing  not  of  sufficient  importance  to  occupy  any 
portion  of  the  precious  hours  of  childhood  and  youth, 
or  as  a  matter  so  uncertain  and  debateable  as  that  the 
safest  way  is  to  let  it  alone.  And  thus  the  most  sus- 
ceptible age,  the  season  in  which  the  impressions  that 
sink  the  deepest  and  last  the  longest  are  made,  is  per- 
mitted to  pass  in  infidelity  and  irreligion,  as  though 
God  had  never  said,  "  they  that  seek  Me  early  shall 
find  Me."  Soon  the  engrossing  cares  of  manhood  suc- 
ceed, and  reach  over  into  the  infirmities  of  age,  and 
thus  multitudes  go  down  to  the  grave  as  unprepared 
as  though  no  Saviour  had  died,  and  no  Holy  Ghost 
had  been  sent  to  sanctify  them. 
The  Faith        $  52.  And  anlfcng  those  who  are  led  to  a 

of  Believers  fftith  m  the  gaviour  the  tmthS  0f  Christi- 
not  so  firm  and  7 

active  as  it  anity  do  not  enter  into  their  souls  and  be- 

would  be  if  ,         r     ,-,  * .  •.  ■* 

there  were  no  come  a  Par*  °*  their  Very  lite  and  COn- 
Sectarianism.  sciousness,  as  do  the  things  which  they  learn 
in  early  years,  and  which  they  have  not  been  accus- 
tomed to  hear  doubted,  contradicted  or  denied.  Their 
faith  is  at  best  sickly  and  limping.  It  yields  and 
bends  before  the  fierce  onset  of  the  temptations  and 
strifes  of  the  world,  or  the  continuous  pressure  of  ap- 
petite and  passion.  Alas  !  alas  !  how  often  does  the 
Ambassador  of  Christ  hear,  as  a  reply  to  his  entreaties, 
made  for  His  Master's  sake,  that  men  would  be  re- 
conciled to  (rod,  that  they  dare  not  undertake  the 
solemn  vows  of  the  Covenant  until  they  are  differently 
situated  in  regard  to  their  worldly  concerns. 

If,  now,  all  who  profess  and  call  themselves  Chris- 
tians were  united  in  faith  and  in  righteousness  of  life, 
and   Christianity  could  enter  into  every  system  and 


X]  EFFECTS    OF   SECTARIANISM.  433 

enterprise  of  education  together  with  the  useful  sci- 
ences— as  a  thing  not  less  important,  and  equally  as 
certain,  as  themselves — what  a  harvest  of  souls  would 
be  gathered  into  the  Redeemer's  Kingdom  ! 

But  now  our  public  means  for  training  the  mind 
and  forming  the  character,  by  neglecting  and  omitting 
Christianity,  tend  to  infidelity — practical  at  least,  if 
not  speculative.  The  Faith  for  the  most  part  retains 
its  hold  upon  the  mind  only  by  the  influence  of  the  in- 
structions which  are  received  at  home :  and  the  ir- 
regular and  spasmodic  efforts  to  awaken  an  interest 
in  the  subject  of  religion,  which  are  made  from  time 
to  time,  under  the  great  disadvantages  of  a  world  of 
opinion,  and  the  force  of  education  against  them,  fail 
altogether,  to  produce  the  desired  effect. 

$  53.  We  cannot,  therefore,  but  regard  Sectarian- 
the  development  of  Sectarianism  as  the  „™dt!™  ^*. 
great  modern  manifestation  of  the  spirit  of  ficeoftheAd- 

*  vprsurv   of 

Anti-Christ,    which,   as   St.  John  says,  was  Soul3> 
even    in   his  day  evident  in  the   world.      It 
leads,   as  we  have  seen,  in  various  ways,  to  irreligion 
and   infidelity,  and  thus  to  the  ruin  of  the  souls  for 
which  ( Ihriei  died. 

$  54.  Now  there  is  no  remedy  for  these      No  remedy 

...  c    .,  mi   •      for  these  evils 

evils  but  a  suspension  oi  their  cause,      lnts  ,mt u r(,lurn to 
implies   that    we   seek  out  an. I    identify    the  lh,,r",mm,,,i- 

1  nn    uf     the 

Chureh  which  our  Blessed  Redeemer  found-  chvrefc 
ed    in    Mis  own  blood,  and   which   must,  at 
last,  triumph  over  all  rivalry  and  opposition.     Snoh  is 
tin-   unchangeable  deoree  of  Him   who  worketh  all 

things  after  the  councils  of  His  own  will. 

In  tin-  country  the  return  from  Sectarianism  to  the 

19 


434  THE  CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Church  is  neither  difficult  nor  uncommon.     It  is  not 
attended  with  the  acquiescence  in  anything  that  is 
repugnant  to  right  feelings,  or  contrary  to  a  sound  in- 
terpretation of  the  Word  of  G-od.     It  is  nothing  un- 
usual to  see  congregations  of  very  good  size  made  up 
entirely  of  persons  who  have  been  gathered  in  from 
the    surrounding    denominations.     A    comparison,  of 
statistics  shows  that  in  our  oldest  and  most  established 
con  cremations  even,  about  one-fourth  of  the   annual 
admissions  to  our  Communion  are  persons  who  have 
belonged   to  some  of  the  Protestant  Sects.     And  be- 
sides all  the  clergy  that  we  raise  among  ourselves — 
and  the  proportion  of  our  young  men  who  incline  to 
the  Ministry  is  very   great — probably  not  less   than 
two-thirds  of  all  we  have — were  brought  up  in  some 
of  the  surrounding   sects  ;  and   about  one-third  had 
been  trained  for,  and  actually  entered,  the  ministry 
among  them  before  they  sought  it  among  us.     It  is 
stated  that  "  out  of  every  two  hundred  and  eighty-five 
persons,  ordained  by  the  late  Bishop  Gtriswold  of  the 
eastern  Diocese,  two  hundred  and  seven  had  come  from 
other  denominations."     The  number  which  we  have 
lost  to  go  to  any  of  the  Protestant  denominations,  is 
inconsiderable.     And  the  few  who  have  become  Pa- 
pists— some  ten  or  fifteen  in  the  whole,  from  first  to 
last — were,  I  believe,  without  an   exception,  persons 
who   had    been  brought   up   among  the    Sects — had 
never  fully  understood  the  Church — and  in  most  cases 
did  not  stay  with  us  long  enough  to  get  into  the  spirit 
of  our  system. 

I  speak  not  of  these  things  by  way  of  boasting — 
Grod  forbid  ! — but  as  significant  facts,  which  show  very 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  435 

conclusively  that  the  course  of  reasoning  which  I 
have  endeavored  to  present  to  the  reader,  has  not 
failed  to  impress  others — and  those,  too,  who  are  the 
best  capable  of  judging  of  it — with  the  same  sense  of 
its  force  as  it  has  myself. 

$  55.  The    abandonment  of   Sectarian-      ™e,Effort 

which  this  re- 
lSm — and  it  must  be  abandoned,  for  a  king-  turn  win  re- 

dom  divided  against  itself  cannot  stand —  oniyVTart  of 
may  require  much  self-denial ;  in  many  cases  the  Repent- 
a  severe  and  protracted  struggle.  But  the  denial  which 
reader  certainly  needs  not  be  told  that  such  a  are  necessary 

J  to  gain   God  a 

struggle  may  be  required  by  His  Saviour.  I  Favor, 
have  the  utmost  confidence  in  the  good  in- 
tentions of  the  vast  majority  of  those  whom  I  believe 
to  be  in  error.  I  entertain  not  the  slightest  doubt  that 
their  salvation  may  be  confidently  hoped  for  through 
the  mercy  of  the  Atoning  Redeemer.  But  I  do  believe 
that  the  subject  of  this  Book  has  not  yet  been  presented 
to  their  minds  and  consciences  as  it  admits  of  being 
presented,  and  as  it  ought  to  have  been.  "Whether  I 
have  done  anything  towards  so  desirable  an  object,  is 
a  question  which  I  must  leave  to  others  to  decide. 

$  56.  Yet  undoubtedly  the  state  of  heart  cJ^eofM°£ 

from    which  a  measure  that  results   in  sotariantni  b» 
,         . .  .  .        •    i  ,  oontliteot 

much  evil    proceeds,  cannot  be  right.  Wllll   B  rik,ht 

1  speak  not   now  of  the  externa]  causes*1"1*  nf  lho 

.  .  Heart, 

whioh  have  acted  upon  many  ol  the  founders 
of  the  modern  Beote,  and  whioh,  as  we  con- 
fidently hope,  will  be  regarded  as  their  exouse  in  the 
day  <>f  judgment.     Ian   after  making  due  allowance 

for  all    such  can-.-,  tbrro    is   no  doubt    that    the  ehief 

moral  oausee  of  Sectarianism  are  pruk  and  self-will. 


436  THE   CHURCH   IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

Men  naturally  have  preferences,  and  the  natural 
preferences,  as  we  must  admit — unless  we  will  deny 
human  depravity — are  not  likely  to  be  in  accordance 
with  Christianity.  If,  therefore,  men  are  too  proud 
to  learn  of  Him,  who  was  "  meek  and  lowly  of  heart," 
or  too  wilful  to  deny  themselves  and  yield  their  pre- 
ferences for  the  sake  of  unity,  harmony  and  peace, 
the  consequence  is  likely  to  be  the  foundation  of  a 
new  Sect. 

The  cases  in  which  the  Church  is  in  the  error,  and 
the  recusant  separates  from  her  communion  for  the 
sake  of  a  truth  more  valuable  than  the  bonds  of  peace 
which  are  sundered  by  his  secession,  are  so  very  rare 
and  unlikely  to  occur  as  that  they  hardly  need  to  be 
taken  into  the  account  at  present.  For  one  such  case, 
there  are  doubtless  a  hundred  in  which  the  opinionated 
individual  himself  is  in  the  wrong. 

Yet,  as  I  fully  believe,  the  chief  responsibility  for 
the  evils  of  Sectarianism  must  rest  on  those  who  are 
its  leaders  and  chief  promoters.  In  every  society  or 
party,  the  majority  are  always  well-meaning  persons, 
even  though  sadly  misled  and  deluded.  Still,  however, 
none  of  those  involved  in  Sectarianism,  can  altogether 
escape  its  evils. 

There  may  *  57«    But>   aftel*    all>   **    *S    n()t  CnieflY    0I1 

be  much  Sec-  account  of  those  out  of  the  Church  that  I 
!nf cl^ch.1*1  have  written.  Among  oursel  res  the  custom 
has  been  far  too  prevalent  of  resting  the 
whole  subject  of  the  claims  of  the  Church  on  one  or 
more  of  the  peculiarities  of  its  constitution ;  thus,  in 
appearance  at  least,  making  the  difference  between 
the  Church  and  the  Sects  to  depend  upon  mere  form 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF    SECTARIANISM.  437 

or  circumstantials.  This  method  can  prove,  at  best, 
only  similarity,  but  not  identity,  between  any  Church 
now  existing  and  that  which  oar  Lord  and  His  Apos- 
tles instituted  ;  and  labors,  moreover,  under  the  dis- 
advantage of  appearing  to  attach  more  importance  to 
matters  of  outward  form  and  organization  than  is  con- 
sistent with  the  spirit  of  Christianity. 

But  further,  this  method  exerts  an  unfavorable  in- 
fluence upon  the  minds  and  characters  of  our  members.  I 
It  is  one  reason,  as  I  have,  no  doubt,  why  we  have  so 
many  among  us  who  seem  to  think  that  the  Church  be- 
longs to  them  instead  of  their  belonging  to  the  Church  ; 
and  therefore  they  claim  to  guide,  control,  and  modify 
its  doctrines  and  usages,  rather  than  submit  to  be 
guided  by  it.  Thus  the  spirit  of  Sectarianism — which 
is  a  great  blight  upon  genuine  piety— is  fostered  in 
the  Church,  and  by  maintaining  its  peculiarities,  no 
less  than  if  the  object  of  our  zeal  were  merely  a  device 
of  our  own.  The  difference  between  a  sectarian  spirit 
and  genuine  piety  is  of  the  most  fundamental  charac- 
ter. The  former  is  a  zeal  for  that  which  we  have 
chosen  to  adopt :  the  latter  is  the  humble  submission 
to  what  we  have  seen  to  be  the  will  of  God.  I  hope 
that  the  mode  of  presenting  the  subject,  which  I  have 
pursued  in  the  foregoing  pages  will  have  some  tenden- 
cy to  promote  this  last  named  state  of  mind  in  the 
Churoh.  For  without  it,  outward  forms  are  of  no 
avail,  and  it  can  be  of  but  little  consequence  whether 
one  is  in  the  Church  or  not. 

$  58.  The  Leading  design  of  the  merciful  dispensa- 
tions «»t"  (iod  to  man  appears  to  be,  to  bring  back  as 
many  as  possible  to  holiness   and  submission  to   his 


438  THE    CHURCH    IDENTIFIED.  [Chap. 

unity  and  W1^'     ^n  tne  accomplishment  of  this  work, 
Harmony   in  the  Church  is  the   chief  visible  means  and 

the     Church  rj    .      ,,  .,  , 

conducive  to  agency,     it  is  the  economy  01  second  causes 
the  grand  de-  through  which  He  works.     In  this,  so  far 

sign  for  which  ° 

our  saviour  as  we  are  permitted  to  judge,  depends  its 
World"10  thC  wno^e  value.  Doubtless  it  is  intrinsically 
better  adapted  to  that  end  than  any  one 
differently  constituted  could  be.  But  how  well  soever 
it  may  be  adapted  to  the  end,  the  whole  tenor  of  the 
Scriptures,  no  less  than  many  explicit  declarations, 
teach  us  that  membership  in  it — unless  one  submits 
to  it,  as  to  the  Messenger  and  Ambassador  of  Christ, 
in  meekness,  humility  and  love — will  be  of  no  avail. 
"  Christ  formed  within  us,"  is  the  grand  result  at 
which  all  its  principles,  functions  and  powers  are  di- 
rected. For  this  an  outward  organization  was  given 
it,  and  incorporated  into  the  very  "  foundation  that 
was  laid  "  by  Jesus  Christ  Himself,  "  that  there  might 
be  no  schism  in  the  body  ; "  for  this  the  elements  of 
its  constitution  were  made  channels  of  divine  grace; 
for  this  the  Holy  Ghost  was  sent  to  abide  with  it  for- 
ever, and  for  this,  charity — which  suffereth  long  and 
is  kind,  which  envieth  not,  vaunteth  not  itself ;  is  not 
puffed  up,  which  doth  not  behave  itself  unseemly, 
seeketh  not  its  own,  is  not  easily  provoked,  and  think- 
eth  no  evil,  rejoiceth  not  in  iniquity,  beareth  all 
things,  believeth  all  things,  hopeth  all  things,  endu- 
reth  all  things,  and  never  fails — is  declared  to  be  "the 
more  excellent  way,"  and  greater  than  even  "  faith 
and  hope." 

Seen  in  this  light,  the  Church  is  no  mere  matter 
of  outv-  >*d  form,  or  combination  of  forms.     It  is  the 


X.]  EFFECTS    OF   SECTARIANISM.  439 

living  witness  and  testimony  of  God — the  sheet  an- 
chor of  religion.     And   we  enter  its  communion,  not 
because  one  or  more  of  the  peculiarities  of  its  consti- 
tution commend  themselves  to  our  judgment,  or  please 
our  fancy,   but  because  we  see,  as  St.  Paul  says   of 
the   Ministry,  that  unto  it,  God  has   committed   the 
work  of  reconciliation,  and   by  it,  as  an  Ambassador, 
Christ  comes  to  us,  beseeching  us  that  we  be  recon- 
ciled to  God.     In  its  comm anion  we  may  be  trained 
for  the  Church  and  communion  above,  where  schisms 
and  divisions  can  never   prevail,  and  where  we  shall 
see,  not  as   now,  through  a  glass  darkly,  but  face  to 
face,  and  know  even  as  we  are  known.     Such  a  view 
of  the  subject   produces  a  softening  and  humilitating 
effect   upon   the  native  hardness  of  the  human  heart, 
and  teaches   us   to   renounce   our  own  will,  that  the 
will  of  God  may  be  done  ;  to  become  nothing  in  our- 
selves, that   Christ  may  the   more   fully  dwell   within 
11-.  and  occupy  all  the  faculties  of  our  mind  and  soul. 
Ami  if  1  BhaU  1><-  found  to  have  done  anything  towards 
the  accomplishment  of  such  a  result,  I  shall  feel  my- 
self most  amply  rewarded  for  the  hours  of  assiduous  toil 
and  prayerful    thought  which  I  have  taken  from  other 
labors  to   bestow  on  this.      That  such  may  be  the  re- 
sult, is  my  prayer   to  Him  who  overruleth  nil    events, 
and  nses  all  things  as  the  agents  of  His  Blessed  Will 


» 

1  ' :  1 :  i:mj 


>    •    •       >    ,    < 


-  • 


. 


-    '      I 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 

This  book  is  due  on  the  date  indicated  below,  or  at  the 
expiration  of  a  definite  period  after  the  date  of  borrowing, 
as  provided  by  the  rules  of  the  Library  or  by  special  ar- 
rangement with  the  Librarian  in  charge. 

DATE  BORROWED 

DATE  DUE 

DATE  BORROWED 

DATE  DUE 

C28(239)M100 

BRITTLE  DO  N 
PHOTOCOPY 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 


0315024024 


S3  6/7  3 


W69 


Wilson 


.s  J— «4-4  -Pi  CkA 


936-73 


V/feS 


0M9H 


n 


I 


'as 
*BfflS 


■ 

PHmh 


4T» 


H 


■    • 


DHRKa 

mtnalmtff 


BHV 


nhmNbh 

UBflUHIAMIl 

HBOV 


Hi 

IMF 


lrt*H»wwfflra! 


jw5*0?^jKwflSw 


